Western Caucasus
Country
Russian Federation
Inscribed in
1999
Criteria
(ix)
(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 Western Caucasus, extending over 275,000 ha of the extreme western end of the Caucasus mountains and located 50 km north-east of the Black Sea, is one of the few large mountain areas of Europe that has not experienced significant human impact. Its subalpine and alpine pastures have only been grazed by wild animals, and its extensive tracts of undisturbed mountain forests, extending from the lowlands to the subalpine zone, are unique in Europe. The site has a great diversity of ecosystems, with important endemic plants and wildlife, and is the place of origin and reintroduction of the mountain subspecies of the European bison. © UNESCO
Summary
2025 Conservation Outlook
Finalised on
11 Oct 2025
Significant concern
Current state and trend of VALUES
High Concern
Overall THREATS
Overall PROTECTION and MANAGEMENT
Full assessment
Description of values
Warm-temperate forest ecosystems
Criterion
(ix)
Key part of Colchic tertiary refuge of warm-temperate forest ecosystems. Rich vertical zonation of forest belts, subalpine, alpine and nival ecosystems from 250 to ca. 2,000 m a.s.l., with predominantly mixed oak woods, beech-fir woods, dark fir woods with Caucasian spruce, mountain birch and maple forests, subalpine and alpine grass and rhododendron communities, as well as alpine shrub and short-grass communities. These ecosystems, which also harbor a rich fauna and are part of the Caucasus global biodiversity hotspot, are among the least affected by humans in Europe, due to their inaccessibility (UNEP-WCMC, 2011).
Subalpine, alpine and nival ecosystems
Criterion
(ix)
Rich vertical zonation of subalpine, alpine and nival ecosystems from ca. 2,000 to 3,360 m a.s.l., with predominantly subalpine and alpine grass and rhododendron communities, as well as alpine shrub and short-grass communities. Together with the above, these ecosystems are part of the Caucasus global biodiversity hotspot, and among the least affected by humans in Europe (UNEP-WCMC, 2011).
Plant species diversity and endemism
Criterion
(x)
1,580 species of vascular plants, one third of which are endemic to the Caucasus. Many additional ones are relict species, or globally/nationally threatened (World Heritage Committee, 1999).
Avifauna
Criterion
(x)
Property is part of Caucasus Endemic Bird Area (BirdLife International, 2012), with populations of Caucasian Black Grouse (Tetrao mlokosiewiczi NT) Caucasian Snowcock (Tetraogallus caucasicus LC) and at least one satellite population of Great Rosefinch (Carpodacus rubicilla), a species of which the next area of distribution is located in Central Asia, as well as a rich raptor fauna (both resident and on migration).
Mammal fauna
Criterion
(x)
81 species of mammals, including carnivores (e.g. European Mink Mustela lutreola, Brown Bear Ursos arctos, Lynx Lynx lynx, Wolf Canis lupus), large herbivores (including Caucasian Red Deer Cervus elaphus maral, Western Tur Capra caucasica EN, and Caucasian Chamois Rubicapra rubicapra caucasica). Reintroduced population of European Bison Bison bonasus (World Heritage Committee, 1999).
Herpetofauna
Criterion
(x)
Two globally threatened viper species which are endemic to the Caucasus (Vipera kaznakovi EN and V. dinniki VU), one globally threatened sub-species of tortoise and seven additional species of herpetofauna (UNEP-WCMC, 2011).
Assessment information
Since its inscription, the property has been relatively well protected by its difficult accessibility and its OUV is still present. However, in the last years and since the 2020 outlook assessment, external pressures have increased considerably, even though no major infrastructure or equipment projects have yet been completed inside the property. Despite repeated requests from the World Heritage Committee, no regional tourism development strategy or genuine long-term vision of socio-economic development taking into account the interest and sensitivity of the property has yet been elaborated that is compatible with the long-term maintenance of its OUV. Furthermore, the media and other various sources of information regularly report on construction projects, road and tourist facilities whose effects on the property, if carried out as they are, would be particularly negative and could jeopardise its values. Although regularly denied by the State Party, this sometimes contradictory information does not dispel serious doubts about the economic development model being promoted in the region which may not meet the obligations of the Convention or its operational guidelines.
Roads, Trails & Railroads
(Construction/maintenance of roads)
Inside site
, Scattered(5-15%)
Outside site
The 2024 IUCN/UNESCO joint reactive monitoring mission (UNESCO and IUCN, 2024) received contradictory information on the State Party's intention to undertake two construction works that have been announced publicly in the press by officials, crossing or adjacent to the property (the Lagonaki-Sochi road and the Arkyz-Krasnaya Polyana railway and highway that would include the development of a 13 km tunnel through the property and connect the North Caucasus to the Black Sea). In 2022, the President of the Russian Federation issued instructions to ‘consider the possibility of construction’ on both roads. “Arkhyz – Krasnaya Polyana” road: Instruction of the President of the Russian Federation dated 10/30/2022 No. Pr-2069GS. “Lagonaki –Krasnaya Polyana” road: Decree of the President of the Russian Federation dated 12.10.2022 No. Pr-1970. If they were undertaken, these two projects may threaten the property’s attributes and values, due to their nature and importance and they may have direct and indirect detrimental impacts on its integrity if they were confirmed (OG, § 180).
It was confirmed to the mission that no other large project of restoration, upgrading or construction of new infrastructures, whatever they are (e.g. roads, railways, airport) are currently planned or underway in the property and in its immediate vicinity, that may have negative effects on its OUV. This includes water reservoirs, pipelines and ski resorts in Zikhiya and on Mt Tabunnnaya.
The Lunnaya poliana road and complex mentioned in the 2020 outlook assessment is still an issue. As was the case for the two previous reactive monitoring missions, the 2024 IUCN/UNESCO joint reactive monitoring mission was not allowed to visit the area from the ground or fly over it and it did also not have the opportunity to examine this question in greater detail with the officials met during its visit. Thus, it is difficult to assess the current situation but there is strong evidence that this facility is not used only for management, research and monitoring activities, as repeatedly reported in the official documents, but also as a winter sports resort. This road is considered by the State Party to be a forest road, constructed and used for forestry and fire prevention, in accordance with the Art. 13 of the Forest Code of the Russian Federation and forest by-laws; the access to the road is strictly regulated but it has been upgraded in the past as confirmed on satellite images. The overall context seems to have been densified but not significantly extended since the 2020 outlook assessment. It also seems to have improved in terms of integration of those facilities into the overall natural landscape. No further works seem to have been undertaken in the near past that have compromised the OUV of the property. Finally, the mission was not able to obtain precise information on the frequency and level of occupation of this complex, which could have provided useful information on the existence and level of potential threats to the integrity of the property.
The 2024 mission also observed recent works for a new road linking Lagonaki and Guzerypl, likely at the border but outside the northern buffer zone of the Caucasus State Nature Biosphere Reserve (CSNBR) that is the main component of the property. Based on information shared by the officials met during the field visit, this infrastructure is located only a few hundred meters from the northern border of the core zone of the CSNBR, and is planned to be extended and completed in the near future.
In conclusion, road construction and maintenance, inside and outside the property, remain an issue for the conservation of the OUV of the property and for the preservation of its functional integrity.
It was confirmed to the mission that no other large project of restoration, upgrading or construction of new infrastructures, whatever they are (e.g. roads, railways, airport) are currently planned or underway in the property and in its immediate vicinity, that may have negative effects on its OUV. This includes water reservoirs, pipelines and ski resorts in Zikhiya and on Mt Tabunnnaya.
The Lunnaya poliana road and complex mentioned in the 2020 outlook assessment is still an issue. As was the case for the two previous reactive monitoring missions, the 2024 IUCN/UNESCO joint reactive monitoring mission was not allowed to visit the area from the ground or fly over it and it did also not have the opportunity to examine this question in greater detail with the officials met during its visit. Thus, it is difficult to assess the current situation but there is strong evidence that this facility is not used only for management, research and monitoring activities, as repeatedly reported in the official documents, but also as a winter sports resort. This road is considered by the State Party to be a forest road, constructed and used for forestry and fire prevention, in accordance with the Art. 13 of the Forest Code of the Russian Federation and forest by-laws; the access to the road is strictly regulated but it has been upgraded in the past as confirmed on satellite images. The overall context seems to have been densified but not significantly extended since the 2020 outlook assessment. It also seems to have improved in terms of integration of those facilities into the overall natural landscape. No further works seem to have been undertaken in the near past that have compromised the OUV of the property. Finally, the mission was not able to obtain precise information on the frequency and level of occupation of this complex, which could have provided useful information on the existence and level of potential threats to the integrity of the property.
The 2024 mission also observed recent works for a new road linking Lagonaki and Guzerypl, likely at the border but outside the northern buffer zone of the Caucasus State Nature Biosphere Reserve (CSNBR) that is the main component of the property. Based on information shared by the officials met during the field visit, this infrastructure is located only a few hundred meters from the northern border of the core zone of the CSNBR, and is planned to be extended and completed in the near future.
In conclusion, road construction and maintenance, inside and outside the property, remain an issue for the conservation of the OUV of the property and for the preservation of its functional integrity.
Logging, Harvesting & Controlling Trees
(Illegal and legal (“sanitary”) logging)
Inside site
, Localised(<5%)
Logging (including illegal and nominally legal ‘sanitary’ logging without clear justification) was reported in the 2020 outlook assessment to be a continuing serious problem. The situation seems to have improved since then, although local degradation of forest ecosystems has been mentioned until recently in the immediate periphery of the property (e.g. Sochi National Park, Lunnaya Polyana forest road) (State Party of the Russian Federation, 2024; Gatti et al., 2021). It would therefore appear that illegal logging inside the property is no longer a major concern for the preservation of the OUV of the property. However, pressure on forest resources outside the property and in its vicinity still seems relatively strong, including in the Sochi National Park (including the tourist infrastructure development) that should be managed as an added layer of protection for the property and in the area adjacent to the Lagonaki Plateau, where logging is taking place for the construction of the resort. The site may also be negatively impacted by logging in the area adjacent to the Lagonaki plateau for the construction of hotels and infrastructure for the Lagonaki resort. To conclude, this improvement is still fragile and could quickly deteriorate, particularly if infrastructure projects such as those mentioned above were undertaken.
Recreation & Tourism Areas
(Tourism facilities/activities inside the site)
Inside site
, Widespread(15-50%)
Outside site
The development of tourism in and around the property (first of all construction of large-scale infrustructure including ski trails and lifts) remains likely the greatest threat to the preservation of the property and its OUV, particularly in the north-west sector, in its immediate vicinity and on the Lagonaki plateau. The recent exclusion of Mts Fisht and Oshten from the economic polygon authorising certain activities within the property represents significant progress and a positive step forward for the preservation of the property's values (UNESCO, 2024).
The new legislation applicable to the development of tourism in protected areas, adopted in 2023 (Federal Law No. 77-FZ “On Amending Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation”), provides, in principle and to a certain extent, a guarantee for the preservation of those values (State Party of the Russian Federation, 2024); however, its implementation and enforcement, particularly by the regional public authorities in the protected areas under their responsibility, must effectively take into account the ecological and biological sensitivity of the property which is not yet fully guaranteed.
Furthermore, the presence of a sector dedicated to the construction of tourist infrastructures in the eastern part of this economic polygon confirms the intention of the public authorities to develop mass tourism activities within the property and very closed to it, in contradiction with the decisions of the World Heritage Committee, which has concluded on several occasions that such activities might not be compatible with the status of World Heritage property (World Heritage Committee, 2024, 2021).
In conclusion, the development of tourism close to and, a fortiori, inside the property in areas of great environmental interest and sensitivity like the Lagonaki Plateau and its surroundings, still constitutes a major threat to the conservation of the OUV of the property and for its functional integrity.
The new legislation applicable to the development of tourism in protected areas, adopted in 2023 (Federal Law No. 77-FZ “On Amending Certain Legislative Acts of the Russian Federation”), provides, in principle and to a certain extent, a guarantee for the preservation of those values (State Party of the Russian Federation, 2024); however, its implementation and enforcement, particularly by the regional public authorities in the protected areas under their responsibility, must effectively take into account the ecological and biological sensitivity of the property which is not yet fully guaranteed.
Furthermore, the presence of a sector dedicated to the construction of tourist infrastructures in the eastern part of this economic polygon confirms the intention of the public authorities to develop mass tourism activities within the property and very closed to it, in contradiction with the decisions of the World Heritage Committee, which has concluded on several occasions that such activities might not be compatible with the status of World Heritage property (World Heritage Committee, 2024, 2021).
In conclusion, the development of tourism close to and, a fortiori, inside the property in areas of great environmental interest and sensitivity like the Lagonaki Plateau and its surroundings, still constitutes a major threat to the conservation of the OUV of the property and for its functional integrity.
Invasive Non-Native/ Alien Species
(Infestation with the invasive box tree moth and other invasive species)
Invasive/problematic species
Cydalima perspectalis
Cryphonectria parasitica
Dryocosmus kuriphilus
Corythucha arcuata
Inside site
, Localised(<5%)
In 2014-2017, the Colchic boxwood forest (total area of about 500 ha) in the World Heritage site was heavily affected by an insect pest. The entire area of Colchic Boxwood forest in the site was destroyed by the invasive box tree moth (UNESCO, 2019).
Box tree moth remain an issue in the Sochi region in general and it is present in the Caucasus Strict Nature Biosphere Reserve (CSNBR) and the entire property, however according to the State Party, no surges of the boxwood moth have been recorded recently (State Party of the Russian Federation, 2024).
More than 70 invasive plant species as well as many invasive fauna species (mammals, reptiles, and insects) have been recorded in the property, therefore invasive species are still a matter of concern for the preservation of the OUV of the property. For example, the Chestnut plan (Castanea savita) is being affected by the phytopathogenic fungus Cryphonectria parasitica and the oriental chestnut gall wasp (Dryocosmus kuriphilus). The impact is being monitored (State Party of the Russian Federation, 2024).
The State Party is developing various projects aiming to fight against these pests:
- improving knowledge and monitoring trends and tendencies of these species, with support of the scientific community;
- restoring the Colchic boxwood forest by plantation ;
- working on improving the legal context in order to better address the protection of protected areas in general from invasive species of fauna and flora.
- combating two other pests, using chemical and biological methods, the oak lace bug and the oriental chestnut gall wasp, which affect oak and chestnut trees respectively, two other species that are emblematic of the region's forests.
Box tree moth remain an issue in the Sochi region in general and it is present in the Caucasus Strict Nature Biosphere Reserve (CSNBR) and the entire property, however according to the State Party, no surges of the boxwood moth have been recorded recently (State Party of the Russian Federation, 2024).
More than 70 invasive plant species as well as many invasive fauna species (mammals, reptiles, and insects) have been recorded in the property, therefore invasive species are still a matter of concern for the preservation of the OUV of the property. For example, the Chestnut plan (Castanea savita) is being affected by the phytopathogenic fungus Cryphonectria parasitica and the oriental chestnut gall wasp (Dryocosmus kuriphilus). The impact is being monitored (State Party of the Russian Federation, 2024).
The State Party is developing various projects aiming to fight against these pests:
- improving knowledge and monitoring trends and tendencies of these species, with support of the scientific community;
- restoring the Colchic boxwood forest by plantation ;
- working on improving the legal context in order to better address the protection of protected areas in general from invasive species of fauna and flora.
- combating two other pests, using chemical and biological methods, the oak lace bug and the oriental chestnut gall wasp, which affect oak and chestnut trees respectively, two other species that are emblematic of the region's forests.
Hunting, Collecting & Controlling Terrestrial Animals, Fishing, Harvesting & Controlling Aquatic Species
(Illegal hunting and fishing)
Inside site
, Extent of threat not known
Reportedly, hunting was a serious problem in the 1990s and reduced since (UNEP-WCMC, 2011). In 2019, seven cases of illegal hunting and fishing were detected by the state inspectors of the Caucasian Reserve staff (State Party of the Russian Federation, 2020). In 2021, no cases of unlawful hunting or fishing was recorded and in 2023 two cases of illegal hunting and 19 cases of illegal fishing were recorded (State Party of the Russian Federation, 2022, 2024), however, generally instances seem low and the impacts of hunting and fishing are negligible regarding the site's OUV.
The trend to improved accessibility and intensified use of the site, particularly for mountain skiing and other forms of tourism has been particularly concerning, especially regarding plans for construction of touristic and mountain skiing facilities on the Lagonaki Plateau, a highly sensitive and important part of the property, and more recently in other protected areas in the vicinity the property, inside the Sochi National Park and the Sochi Federal Wildlife Refuge. In combination with the potential negative impacts of climate change on the site's important attributes, especially on the glacial alpin and subalpine ecosystems, the potential threats are considered high. Proposed roads crossing or adjacent to the property (the Lagonaki-Sochi road and the Arkyz-Krasnaya Polyana railway and highway that would include the development of a 13 km tunnel through the property) are of high concern.
Recreation & Tourism Areas
(Planned development of tourism and mountain skiing facilities within and in the vicinity of the site)
Inside site
, Widespread(15-50%)
The 2020 outlook assessment is still valid. The high ecological and biological value of the Lagonaki plateau has been confirmed by the most recent scientific works (inter alia : Akatova, 2021 ; Litvinskaia et al., 2024 ; Akatova et al., 2024) as well as its sensitivity (Urbanaviciene & Urbanavicius, 2023), in an overall context of climate change where snow cover in the Caucasus is tending to shrink (Pogorelov et al., 2017; Pogorelov et al., 2019). The 2024 IUCN/UNESCO joint reactive monitoring mission recommended to avoid building any large tourism infrastructure and facilities in the Lagonaki Plateau and in any other sectors of the property, as well as in its immediate vicinity (UNESCO and IUCN, 2024).
The development of residential, commercial and recreation areas in or close to the property may pose a threat to its OUV, depending on the tourism concept. In the current absence of a precise technical project, however, it is difficult to draw any precise conclusions about the nature and level of these threats, which will have to be assessed once the project has been finalised. In the light of the available data and information, which are likely to change in the future, the tourist constructions and developments that could be carried out on the Lagonaki Plateau, in the property area in general or in its immediate vicinity, are considered as threatening to the OUV of the property.
The development of residential, commercial and recreation areas in or close to the property may pose a threat to its OUV, depending on the tourism concept. In the current absence of a precise technical project, however, it is difficult to draw any precise conclusions about the nature and level of these threats, which will have to be assessed once the project has been finalised. In the light of the available data and information, which are likely to change in the future, the tourist constructions and developments that could be carried out on the Lagonaki Plateau, in the property area in general or in its immediate vicinity, are considered as threatening to the OUV of the property.
Recreational Activities
(Increase of tourism and use pressure)
Inside site
, Localised(<5%)
Since the last 2020 outlook assessment, progress has been made to improve knowledge and theoretically manage better tourism pressure in the property and all other protected areas. New regulation on tourism has been adopted for protected areas of both national and regional importance. This new regulation should lead to optimizing tourism activities and pressure in the future, in each component of the property, based on their own carrying capacities; however it is not yet fully implemented and enforced.
In addition, other uses and activities such as hunting, both legal and illegal, and motor vehicle traffic (4x4 cars, snow scooters, trial motorbikes) can have major negative effects on species and ecosystems, and degrade the integrity of the property.
Such risks were highlighted by the 2024 IUCN/UNESCO joint reactive monitoring mission, including in certain sectors of the regional components of the property whose boundaries may have recently been modified as a result of a change in their legal protection status (UNESCO and IUCN, 2024). In relation to the Bolshoy Thach Nature Park, the boundaries have already been changed by the order of the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Adygea dated September 14, 2023 No. 315-r. As a result, part of the park's territory, including the peaks of the Bolshoy and Maly Thach mountains, ended up outside the park's boundaries, which led to an increase in the load on these territories, in particular, mass traffic on off-road vehicles (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
In addition, the significant increase in visitor numbers to Sochi National Park is leading to additional pressure on the property, which should lead the State Party and the manager to strengthen protection measures outside and in the immediate vicinity of the property by finalising the process underway to create a buffer zone around its perimeter.
Overall, the situation has deteriorated since the 2020 outlook assessment, with tourism development in the immediate vicinity of the property posing increasing threats to its integrity, despite recent legal measures, the effectiveness of which has yet to be demonstrated.
In addition, other uses and activities such as hunting, both legal and illegal, and motor vehicle traffic (4x4 cars, snow scooters, trial motorbikes) can have major negative effects on species and ecosystems, and degrade the integrity of the property.
Such risks were highlighted by the 2024 IUCN/UNESCO joint reactive monitoring mission, including in certain sectors of the regional components of the property whose boundaries may have recently been modified as a result of a change in their legal protection status (UNESCO and IUCN, 2024). In relation to the Bolshoy Thach Nature Park, the boundaries have already been changed by the order of the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Adygea dated September 14, 2023 No. 315-r. As a result, part of the park's territory, including the peaks of the Bolshoy and Maly Thach mountains, ended up outside the park's boundaries, which led to an increase in the load on these territories, in particular, mass traffic on off-road vehicles (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
In addition, the significant increase in visitor numbers to Sochi National Park is leading to additional pressure on the property, which should lead the State Party and the manager to strengthen protection measures outside and in the immediate vicinity of the property by finalising the process underway to create a buffer zone around its perimeter.
Overall, the situation has deteriorated since the 2020 outlook assessment, with tourism development in the immediate vicinity of the property posing increasing threats to its integrity, despite recent legal measures, the effectiveness of which has yet to be demonstrated.
Changes in Temperature Regimes, Changes in Precipitation & Hydrological Regime
(Frequency of extreme weather)
Inside site
, Throughout(>50%)
Outside site
The property is subject to the global effects of climate change; scientific studies show the effects of these changes in particular on the glacial, alpine and subalpine ecosystems present on its territory (Pogorelov et al., 2017), including in areas of high ecological and biological values and particularly sensitive as the Lagonaki Plateau (Anatoliy et al., 2019). Increased frequency of extreme weather conditions are expected to affect in particular the warm temperate forest ecosystems (State Party of the Russian Federation, 2024). Additionally, warmer mean temperatures may lead to range shifts in plant species and increased occurence and distribution of invasive alien species (e.g. Pshegusov et al., 2019; Romeiro et al., 2022).
Involvement of stakeholders and rightsholders, including indigenous peoples and local communities, in decision-making processes
Generally the coordination mechanism is very vertical, and the participation of all stakeholders regularly raises strong reactions from nature protection associations. It also seems that coordination between the federal and regional levels is not always as good as it could be (e.g. the question of the legal protection regime for the CSNBR northern buffer zone, and the transposition of new federal tourism regulations to the regional level).
Legal framework
The Federal Law 33-FZ dated 14 March 1995 “On specially protected natural areas” provides the basis for protected areas and lists diverse types of protected areas at the federal (strict nature reserves, national parks, wildlife reserves and natural monuments) and regional levels (nature parks, nature reserves and natural monuments). It also regulates the organisation and management regime of those areas and is applicable to all protected areas comprising the property.
The property comprises five protected areas created under different protection regimes:
- the CSNBR whose protection and management rules are currently specified in the Order of the MNRE No. 981 dated 15 February 2022. According to Russian legislation, the buffer zone of the reserve is not part of it, therefore it is not reflected in the regulations on the reserve. The buffer zone must be created by a separate document of the Ministry of Natural Resources of Russia. However, the liquidated buffer zone of the reserve has not yet been recreated. The decision of the Ministry of Natural Resources on the creation of the buffer zone and approval of its regime has not been adopted. Any use and activity that contradict the objectives of the reserve that are focused on biodiversity protection, research, education and monitoring, and its protection regime are prohibited. However, forest and tourism activities may be allowed as long as they are fully compatible with these objectives and do respect the World Heritage obligations and requirements. The order fixes also a special protection regime for the territory of the “Lagonaki biosphere polygon” established in 2021, where educational tourism as well as sport activities can be allowed.
- three Nature parks are protected and managed under the responsibility of the regional government institution of the Republic of Adygea, according to orders from the regional government: the Mountain Adygea Nature park and the river Tsitsa Headwaters Nature park that replaced former Natural monuments in 2020, and the Bolshoï Thach Nature park that existed when the site was listed as World Heritage and have been adapted in 2023;
- the Ridge Bujjnij Natural monument is also protected and managed under the Regional Law; its status and regime have not changed since the last reactive monitoring mission.
The recent conversion of two natural monuments into nature parks also seems to have weakened the legal protection regime of those territories by authorising de jure and by exception, construction of linear facilities and hydraulic infrastructures (Art. 1.3) as well as the development of deposits of mineral resources (Art. 3.2) and sanitary logging (Art. 4) within their economic zone. Such activities may not be compatible with the preservation of species and ecosystems as well as the environmental processes, referred to in criteria (ix) and (x) of the Convention, under which the property was inscribed; and they may have significant negative effects on the property and its OUV and threaten its functional integrity (OG, § 180). This should be appreciated case by case.
The property comprises five protected areas created under different protection regimes:
- the CSNBR whose protection and management rules are currently specified in the Order of the MNRE No. 981 dated 15 February 2022. According to Russian legislation, the buffer zone of the reserve is not part of it, therefore it is not reflected in the regulations on the reserve. The buffer zone must be created by a separate document of the Ministry of Natural Resources of Russia. However, the liquidated buffer zone of the reserve has not yet been recreated. The decision of the Ministry of Natural Resources on the creation of the buffer zone and approval of its regime has not been adopted. Any use and activity that contradict the objectives of the reserve that are focused on biodiversity protection, research, education and monitoring, and its protection regime are prohibited. However, forest and tourism activities may be allowed as long as they are fully compatible with these objectives and do respect the World Heritage obligations and requirements. The order fixes also a special protection regime for the territory of the “Lagonaki biosphere polygon” established in 2021, where educational tourism as well as sport activities can be allowed.
- three Nature parks are protected and managed under the responsibility of the regional government institution of the Republic of Adygea, according to orders from the regional government: the Mountain Adygea Nature park and the river Tsitsa Headwaters Nature park that replaced former Natural monuments in 2020, and the Bolshoï Thach Nature park that existed when the site was listed as World Heritage and have been adapted in 2023;
- the Ridge Bujjnij Natural monument is also protected and managed under the Regional Law; its status and regime have not changed since the last reactive monitoring mission.
The recent conversion of two natural monuments into nature parks also seems to have weakened the legal protection regime of those territories by authorising de jure and by exception, construction of linear facilities and hydraulic infrastructures (Art. 1.3) as well as the development of deposits of mineral resources (Art. 3.2) and sanitary logging (Art. 4) within their economic zone. Such activities may not be compatible with the preservation of species and ecosystems as well as the environmental processes, referred to in criteria (ix) and (x) of the Convention, under which the property was inscribed; and they may have significant negative effects on the property and its OUV and threaten its functional integrity (OG, § 180). This should be appreciated case by case.
Governance arrangements
The management of the property is under the lead and control of the MNRE (Ministry of Natural Resources and Ecology), in close cooperation with the governmental authorities of the Republic of Adygea, with regards to the protected areas of regional significance that are included in the property and placed under its direct legal competence. However the coordination between the different state government institutions of the specially protected natural areas of regional significance could be improved. In the absence of an overall management plan for all five components, all managers develop their own vision and strategy for the conservation of the property, and they have significant different expectations.
Integration into local, regional and national planning systems (including sea/landscape connectivity)
Coordination between the various levels of federal and regional stakeholders is not always easy, in the absence of a overall management plan for the entire property, which sets out a shared vision for this management, despite the recommendations of the various reactive monitoring missions and repeated requests from the World Heritage Committee.
Boundaries
The question of the status and boundaries of the property has been controversial for many years.
This issue has been raised by the Committee in most of its decisions since the site was inscribed; it has also been the subject of recommendations reiterated in all the reactive monitoring mission and advisory reports.
The northern buffer zone of the CNSBR was nominated by the State Party and inscribed on the WH in 1999; established in 1996, this zone was canceled at regional level in 1998 and not re-established to date. Its boundaries and status are currently indecisive and imprecise under the law, while socio-economic pressure on it is very high and increasing. The legal protection regime of this zone, de jure remains the same as stipulated in the nomination dossier with regard to the World Heritage Convention and its OG.
However, it does not benefit currently from an appropriate effective regime of protection and management, meeting the standards required in the OG (§ 98 inter alia). The boundaries of the Bolshoy Thach Nature Park have been changed by the order of the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Adygea dated September 14, 2023 No. 315-r. As a result, part of the park's territory, including the peaks of the Bolshoy and Maly Thach mountains, ended up outside the park's boundaries, which led to an increase in the load on these territories, in particular, mass traffic of off-road vehicles.
This issue has been raised by the Committee in most of its decisions since the site was inscribed; it has also been the subject of recommendations reiterated in all the reactive monitoring mission and advisory reports.
The northern buffer zone of the CNSBR was nominated by the State Party and inscribed on the WH in 1999; established in 1996, this zone was canceled at regional level in 1998 and not re-established to date. Its boundaries and status are currently indecisive and imprecise under the law, while socio-economic pressure on it is very high and increasing. The legal protection regime of this zone, de jure remains the same as stipulated in the nomination dossier with regard to the World Heritage Convention and its OG.
However, it does not benefit currently from an appropriate effective regime of protection and management, meeting the standards required in the OG (§ 98 inter alia). The boundaries of the Bolshoy Thach Nature Park have been changed by the order of the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Adygea dated September 14, 2023 No. 315-r. As a result, part of the park's territory, including the peaks of the Bolshoy and Maly Thach mountains, ended up outside the park's boundaries, which led to an increase in the load on these territories, in particular, mass traffic of off-road vehicles.
Overlapping international designations
The Western Caucasus (or Kavkazskiy) Biosphere Reserve was set up as a biosphere reserve in 1978 on 800,723.00 ha.
Implementation of World Heritage Committee decisions and recommendations
Since the 2020 outlook assessment, the property has been the subject of recommendations by the WHC in 2021 (44COM 7B.110), 2023 (45COM 7B.27) and 2024 (46COM 7B.54); these decisions essentially renewed the expectations of the WHC expressed since the early 2000s in some fifteen decisions of the committee relating mainly to the legal protection status and boundaries of the property, as well as the progress of major infrastructure projects that could affect its OUV and degrade its integrity.
In the light of the conclusions and recommendations of the 2024 IUCN-UNESCO joint reactive monitoring mission, many of the Committee's expectations have not yet been satisfactorily met by the State Party and are still matters of major concern for the preservation of the OUV of the property (UNESCO and IUCN, 2024).
In the light of the conclusions and recommendations of the 2024 IUCN-UNESCO joint reactive monitoring mission, many of the Committee's expectations have not yet been satisfactorily met by the State Party and are still matters of major concern for the preservation of the OUV of the property (UNESCO and IUCN, 2024).
Climate action
The property is subject to the global effects of climate change; recent scientific studies show the effects of these changes in particular on the glacial, alpine and subalpine ecosystems present on its territory (Pogorelov et al., 2017), including in areas of high ecological and biological values and particularly sensitive as the Lagonaki Plateau (Pogorelov et al., 2019). However, the extent to which climate action is integrated into the site's management is unclear.
Management plan and overall management system
The development and implementation of an overall comprehensive management system for the whole property, meeting the international standards and requirements (OG, § 132) has been a permanent recommendation of previous missions and subject in the past to frequent requests from the Committee. According to the conclusion of the 2024 IUCN-UNESCO joint reactive monitoring mission, a process of elaborating such a system of management for the whole property may be engaged in the near future, under the coordination of the reserve administration (UNESCO and IUCN, 2024).
The coordination of this management between the various federal and regional/local structures responsible for managing the components of the property is currently both a challenge and a necessity.
Furthermore, a biosphere polygon - namely the “Lagonaki Biosphere Polygon” – has been set up in the property in 2021 covering a total area of 13 901,12 ha; this polygon aims at developing recreational activities that comply with requirements of the federal legislation on environment, protected areas and environmental expertise. Facilities and infrastructures can be built within the polygon such as houses and buildings, visitor centres, guesthouses, lifts, cableways, ski slopes and various objects for transportation, engineering and functioning of the above-listed objects. The State Party has confirmed that it is considering the possibility of building an all-season mountain resort in this area.
For all these reasons, the property does not currently benefit from a management system that fully meets the obligations of the Convention and its operational guidelines.
The coordination of this management between the various federal and regional/local structures responsible for managing the components of the property is currently both a challenge and a necessity.
Furthermore, a biosphere polygon - namely the “Lagonaki Biosphere Polygon” – has been set up in the property in 2021 covering a total area of 13 901,12 ha; this polygon aims at developing recreational activities that comply with requirements of the federal legislation on environment, protected areas and environmental expertise. Facilities and infrastructures can be built within the polygon such as houses and buildings, visitor centres, guesthouses, lifts, cableways, ski slopes and various objects for transportation, engineering and functioning of the above-listed objects. The State Party has confirmed that it is considering the possibility of building an all-season mountain resort in this area.
For all these reasons, the property does not currently benefit from a management system that fully meets the obligations of the Convention and its operational guidelines.
Law enforcement
The enforcement of the law within the property does not currently seem to pose major problems; however, illegal activities are noted each year by the warden in the CSNBR (eg. poaching for hunting and fishing, illegal presence of people in certain sectors, overflight and landing of aircraft). In 2023, 134 instances of illegal presence on the territory were recorded along with 2 cases of illegal hunting, 19 cases of illegal fishing, 39 cases of illegal flight and landing of aircraft and 39 other incidences (State Party of the Russian Federation, 2024). There is virtually no information about violations in regional protected areas, in part likely due to the low number of the security service. Some uses (e.g. 4x4 vehicles and motorbikes) within certain parts of the property (especially in a Bolshoy Tkhach Nature Park) may also present a local threat to its functional integrity and put pressure on its ecological and biological value.
Furthermore, the implementation of federal texts at local level, for example in the field of tourism, would require a particular effort from the regional authorities.
Lastly, the full transposition of international law (WH Convention), particularly with regard to the legal protection of the northern buffer zone of the CSNBR, is not either currently guaranteed by the domestic law of the State party.
Furthermore, the implementation of federal texts at local level, for example in the field of tourism, would require a particular effort from the regional authorities.
Lastly, the full transposition of international law (WH Convention), particularly with regard to the legal protection of the northern buffer zone of the CSNBR, is not either currently guaranteed by the domestic law of the State party.
Sustainable finance
Funding for the management of the property comes mainly from the federal budget and, in the case of the components under the responsibility of the regional authorities, partly from the latter. The issue of securing funding has never been raised by the various reactive monitoring missions, nor in the WHC's decisions; it does not appear to pose a major problem, however the lack of an adequate system for protecting regional protected areas indicates that funding may insufficient.
Staff capacity, training and development
The human resources allocated to the protection and management of the Caucasus Reserve are adequate. In addition to the staff directly assigned to its conservation, the Reserve also benefits from the staff of the SNP, i.e. around a thousand agents, now placed under the authority of a single directorate for both the SNP and the CSNBR. In 2021, the Caucasus Reserve was being protected by a staff of state inspectors consisting of 80 inspectors (State Party of the Russian Federation, 2022).
As for regional PAs, the situation is different. Inspectors at regional PAs in the Republic of Adygea do not have the authority to issue protocols and fines (unlike inspectors of the Caucasus Reserve), they can only hold discussions with tourists and issue safety leaflets and rules for staying in the territory. Inspectors of regional PAs in the Republic of Adygea are not permanently on the territory (there are no cordons or other accommodation for inspectors). Judging by messages on the official pages in social networks, inspectors of the natural parks ‘Bolshoi Tkhach’ and ‘Gornaya Adygeya’ visit the territory 1-2 times a month. There is no information about the work of inspectors on the territory of the natural park ‘River Tsitsa Headwaters’. The number of inspectors is insufficient. According to the report of the Director of the Natural Park ‘Bolshoi Tkhach ’ from 26 July 2024, the staff of inspectors of the natural park is only 3 people. There is no information on the number of inspectors in other PAs of regional significance (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
As for regional PAs, the situation is different. Inspectors at regional PAs in the Republic of Adygea do not have the authority to issue protocols and fines (unlike inspectors of the Caucasus Reserve), they can only hold discussions with tourists and issue safety leaflets and rules for staying in the territory. Inspectors of regional PAs in the Republic of Adygea are not permanently on the territory (there are no cordons or other accommodation for inspectors). Judging by messages on the official pages in social networks, inspectors of the natural parks ‘Bolshoi Tkhach’ and ‘Gornaya Adygeya’ visit the territory 1-2 times a month. There is no information about the work of inspectors on the territory of the natural park ‘River Tsitsa Headwaters’. The number of inspectors is insufficient. According to the report of the Director of the Natural Park ‘Bolshoi Tkhach ’ from 26 July 2024, the staff of inspectors of the natural park is only 3 people. There is no information on the number of inspectors in other PAs of regional significance (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
Education and interpretation programmes
The property has SNP and CSNBR staff and facilities for education and interpretation; these facilities are modern and of good quality, as are the communication media and website available. A branch of the CSNBR is located to the north of the property, in the town of Maikop, where it houses a team of scientific and technical staff. There is no information on the situation in regional PAs.
Tourism and visitation management
The development of tourism in and around the property is one of the most sensitive issues for the conservation and management of the property (see § Threats).
The increase in tourist numbers, particularly in Sochi and the surrounding area, is creating a growing demand in the SNP, which receives almost a million visitors a year, and also in the CSNBR, subject to ever-increasing anthropogenic pressures.
The desire of the regional authorities to develop tourism on the northern boundary of the property, but also in some parts of the property (eg Lagonaki Plateau and Natural Parks), places the management of tourism and recreational activities in general at the heart of the debate on maintenance of the OUV of the property.
The recent changes to the legislation in the tourism sector should be a step forward
to improve the monitoring and organisation of these activities (no less than 14 acts has been adopted in 2023 on recreational activities and tourism in protected areas), provided that these measures become effective, including in the components of the property placed under the responsibility of the regional public authorities, and that these authorities integrate the presence of the property and respect for its values into their strategies and facilities programmes.
At present, the conditions are not fully in place to guarantee tourism development that respects these values and make it compatible with maintaining the OUV of the property.
The increase in tourist numbers, particularly in Sochi and the surrounding area, is creating a growing demand in the SNP, which receives almost a million visitors a year, and also in the CSNBR, subject to ever-increasing anthropogenic pressures.
The desire of the regional authorities to develop tourism on the northern boundary of the property, but also in some parts of the property (eg Lagonaki Plateau and Natural Parks), places the management of tourism and recreational activities in general at the heart of the debate on maintenance of the OUV of the property.
The recent changes to the legislation in the tourism sector should be a step forward
to improve the monitoring and organisation of these activities (no less than 14 acts has been adopted in 2023 on recreational activities and tourism in protected areas), provided that these measures become effective, including in the components of the property placed under the responsibility of the regional public authorities, and that these authorities integrate the presence of the property and respect for its values into their strategies and facilities programmes.
At present, the conditions are not fully in place to guarantee tourism development that respects these values and make it compatible with maintaining the OUV of the property.
Sustainable use
The use of natural resources inside the property is forbidden and/or strictly regulated, depending on the components.
However, the legal protection regime for certain components (eg. natural parks) allows by exception to building hydraulic structures and operating selective and health tree cutting that may lead to unwise uses of water and forest resources.
Such uses may not be compatible with the intactness of the property that is part of its integrity and it may also perturb the ecological and biological processes on the basis of which the property was listed under criterion (ix)
However, the legal protection regime for certain components (eg. natural parks) allows by exception to building hydraulic structures and operating selective and health tree cutting that may lead to unwise uses of water and forest resources.
Such uses may not be compatible with the intactness of the property that is part of its integrity and it may also perturb the ecological and biological processes on the basis of which the property was listed under criterion (ix)
Monitoring
Monitoring activities in the property are undertaken according to various federal regulations, mainly: the Order of the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment of the Russian Federation No. 456 "On Approval of the Procedure for Conducting State Monitoring and State Cadastre of Wildlife Objects" dated 30 June 2021; the Decree of the Government of the Russian Federation No. 681 On State Environmental Monitoring; with support from the State Fund of State Environmental Monitoring Data set up on 9 August 2013 and amended on 30 November 2018.
The MNRE has the responsibility for the oversight of the protection of the property, determining the executive bodies in charge of specific monitoring, protection and management activities, in accordance with the Law on environmental protection and in collaboration with the regional authorities.
Specific monitoring activities are devoted among other fields, to wildlife state of conservation and trends, meteorology and climate change, fire events, invasive species, reintroduction of the Persian leopard and development of tourism. These activities are reinforced by research efforts carried out in conjunction with the scientific community on specific subjects (e. g. climate change, Pogorelov et al., 2017) or particular species (e.g. brown bear, Trepet et al., 2020).
There is a lack of information about monitoring on regional protected areas.
The MNRE has the responsibility for the oversight of the protection of the property, determining the executive bodies in charge of specific monitoring, protection and management activities, in accordance with the Law on environmental protection and in collaboration with the regional authorities.
Specific monitoring activities are devoted among other fields, to wildlife state of conservation and trends, meteorology and climate change, fire events, invasive species, reintroduction of the Persian leopard and development of tourism. These activities are reinforced by research efforts carried out in conjunction with the scientific community on specific subjects (e. g. climate change, Pogorelov et al., 2017) or particular species (e.g. brown bear, Trepet et al., 2020).
There is a lack of information about monitoring on regional protected areas.
Research
The CSNBR as well as the SNP have scientific committees composed of members of staff and the academic sector (eg: Maikop State Technological Iniversity, A.K. Tembotov Institute of Mountain Ecology, Adygea State University)
The property manager also collaborates with the Academy of Sciences (Severtsov Institute) on certain specific projects (eg: reintroduction of the Persian leopard).
Since the last outlook assessment, the research effort focused in particular on the following themes:
- change in the composition and structure of forest ecosystems in the Lunnaya Poliana and Lagonaki sectors, under anthropogenic pressure;
- flora adventization in the Lunnaya Poliana sector;
- experimentation of methods for restoring mountain forests and meadows, and high-mountain ecosystems from anthropogenic disturbances in the Lunnaya Poliana sector;
- monitoring of the results of the experimentation of methods for restoring mountain forests and meadows, and high-mountain ecosystems from anthropogenic disturbances in the Lunnaya Poliana sector;
- changes in the composition and structure of vegetation under anthropogenic pressure in the Lunnaya Poliana and Lagonaki Plateau sectors;
- monitoring of populations of synanthropic fauna species in the Lagonaki highlands.
The property manager also collaborates with the Academy of Sciences (Severtsov Institute) on certain specific projects (eg: reintroduction of the Persian leopard).
Since the last outlook assessment, the research effort focused in particular on the following themes:
- change in the composition and structure of forest ecosystems in the Lunnaya Poliana and Lagonaki sectors, under anthropogenic pressure;
- flora adventization in the Lunnaya Poliana sector;
- experimentation of methods for restoring mountain forests and meadows, and high-mountain ecosystems from anthropogenic disturbances in the Lunnaya Poliana sector;
- monitoring of the results of the experimentation of methods for restoring mountain forests and meadows, and high-mountain ecosystems from anthropogenic disturbances in the Lunnaya Poliana sector;
- changes in the composition and structure of vegetation under anthropogenic pressure in the Lunnaya Poliana and Lagonaki Plateau sectors;
- monitoring of populations of synanthropic fauna species in the Lagonaki highlands.
Effectiveness of management system and governance in addressing threats outside the site
The property's management system and governance have little direct effect on external threats. However, the fact that the conservation and management of the CSNBR and the SNP are now carried out by a single body is a major step towards a more comprehensive and effective management of the two protected areas, and the property in general.
The absence of a buffer zone around the perimeter of the property does not help to minimise these external threats, which are increasingly strong and diverse; the establishment of such a buffer zone, as initiated by the State Party, would constitute a significant improvement in the protection of the OUV of the property.
The absence of a buffer zone around the perimeter of the property does not help to minimise these external threats, which are increasingly strong and diverse; the establishment of such a buffer zone, as initiated by the State Party, would constitute a significant improvement in the protection of the OUV of the property.
Effectiveness of management system and governance in addressing threats inside the site
Placed under the responsibility of several federal and regional stakeholders, the property's management system and its governance do not enable the threats to its conservation to be addressed in the best possible way; this system does not allow to optimise the conservation and management efforts devoted to the property and each component.
In the absence of an overall management plan for all five components, all managers develop their own vision and strategy for the conservation of the property, and they have significant different expectations.
In the future, it would be important for the federal and regional authorities to set up a common vision based on a overall comprehensive management plan for the whole property, which would then be implemented in each component, while respecting their own fields of responsibility.
In the absence of an overall management plan for all five components, all managers develop their own vision and strategy for the conservation of the property, and they have significant different expectations.
In the future, it would be important for the federal and regional authorities to set up a common vision based on a overall comprehensive management plan for the whole property, which would then be implemented in each component, while respecting their own fields of responsibility.
The current protection and management regime of the property site is not effective in relation to the main current and potential internal and external threats (e.g. development of unsustainable tourism, potential construction of large infrastructures). This level of effectiveness comes partly from the absence of a common vision and strategy among the federal and regional managers, and from the lack of coordination between them. The development and implementation of an overall comprehensive management system for the whole property, meeting the international standards and requirements (OG, § 132) has been a permanent recommendation of previous missions and subject in the past requests from the Committee. However, the fact that the conservation and management of the CSNBR and the SNP are now carried out by a single body is a major step towards a more comprehensive and effective management of the two protected areas, and the property in general. Another key issue is the effectiveness of boundaries. For example the boundaries of the Bolshoy Thach Nature Park have been changed by the order of the Cabinet of Ministers of the Republic of Adygea. As a result, part of the park's territory, including the peaks of the Bolshoy and Maly Thach mountains, ended up outside the park's boundaries, which led to an increase in the load on these territories, in particular, from mass traffic of off-road vehicles.
Warm-temperate forest ecosystems
Low Concern
Trend
Stable
The context has not degraded significantly since the 2020 outlook assessment. The property still benefits from a high integrity of its forest ecosystems mainly due to its relatively difficult accessibility; no new large infrastructure has been built since then but pressure of all kinds is increasing in the immediate vicinity of the property. The State Party is developing an extensive programme to combat invasive species that threaten and have already seriously damaged certain plant associations, in particular the Colchic boxwood oak and chestnut forests. The situation seems to have stabilised in recent years, but the threat of new attacks remains high, particularly on the edges of the property.
Subalpine, alpine and nival ecosystems
High Concern
Trend
Deteriorating
There is still a great pressure on these areas, which are coveted for the development of winter tourism, particularly due to the creation of an economic polygon on the Lagonaki Plateau in 2021.
Despite the withdrawal of the Mts Fisht and Oshten initially included in the polygon project, there is still a risk that mass tourism will develop locally in a sector of great ecological and biological interest, to the detriment of the functional integrity of the property.
Furthermore, recent studies have shown the effects of climate change on the state of conservation of these high mountain areas and their already visible effects on snow levels and, in general, on the preservation of water resources. It should be noted that the State Party reports that the mountain meadow of landscape of the Biosphere Reserve on the Lago-Naki plateau has had a positive trend with restoration of the plant communities continuing after the excessive grazing in 1980-90s (State Party of the Russian Federation, 2024).
Despite the withdrawal of the Mts Fisht and Oshten initially included in the polygon project, there is still a risk that mass tourism will develop locally in a sector of great ecological and biological interest, to the detriment of the functional integrity of the property.
Furthermore, recent studies have shown the effects of climate change on the state of conservation of these high mountain areas and their already visible effects on snow levels and, in general, on the preservation of water resources. It should be noted that the State Party reports that the mountain meadow of landscape of the Biosphere Reserve on the Lago-Naki plateau has had a positive trend with restoration of the plant communities continuing after the excessive grazing in 1980-90s (State Party of the Russian Federation, 2024).
Plant species diversity and endemism
Low Concern
Trend
Stable
As concluded in 2020, in the last outlook assessment, plant species diversity including that of globally threatened, endemic and relict species is still relatively intact, but likely to become increasingly threatened if construction projects in key local centres of plant diversity such as Lagonaki Plateau, go ahead.
However, the removal of Mts Fisht and Oshten from the initial perimeter of the economic polygon created in 2021 represents significant progress since the last outlook assessment.
The same applies to the State Party's efforts to combat invasive species, both technically through appropriate technical measures giving priority to biological control, and by improving the legal framework in this area.
However, the removal of Mts Fisht and Oshten from the initial perimeter of the economic polygon created in 2021 represents significant progress since the last outlook assessment.
The same applies to the State Party's efforts to combat invasive species, both technically through appropriate technical measures giving priority to biological control, and by improving the legal framework in this area.
Avifauna
Good
Trend
Stable
As concluded in the 2020 outlook assessment, none of the restricted-range avifauna of the Caucasus Endemic Bird Area overlapping with the property, is considered globally threatened. Other key components of the site's avifauna also appear to be generally intact, although the most recent assessments in this area date back some ten years; the most recent information provided by the State Party to the 2014 IUCN/UNESCO joint reactive mission does not reveal either any notable deterioration in the avifauna on the property, or in the SNP which borders it.
Mammal fauna
High Concern
Trend
Deteriorating
Since the 2020 outlook assessment, the conservation status of emblematic species has been assessed differently depending on the species:
- populations of large ungulates appear to be relatively stable and satisfactory according to the information provided by the State Party (eg: bison, thur, chamois, deer).
- populations of large carnivores have in some cases declined sharply, as have their respective ranges, which in most cases exceed the boundaries of the property at certain times of the year, for biological reasons (e.g. denning, reproduction).
For example, the intensive development of tourism in the Sochi region and construction, including in the SNP, in the recent years, has led to significant degradation and loss of habitats favourable to the brown bear (Ursus arctos meridionalis). This is particularly the case with the construction of the new road built in the early 2010s in the Mzymta valley and which has continued to develop ever since; according to the scientific literature, this infrastructure has disrupted the seasonal movements of large animals, including the brown bear, in an important wintering area for those species (Trepet, 2020).
The possible construction of new roads and other access routes in this valley and more widely within the area of the property (CSNBR) poses a significant risk of degrading its integrity, calling into question the property's values recognised under criterion (x) and also criterion (ix) of the Convention, on the basis of which it was inscribed on the World Heritage List.
Lastly, the reintroduction of the Persian leopard (Panthera pardus tuliana) into the property, as part of the compensatory measures for the impact of the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics is still ongoing and could strengthen the ecological and biological values of the property; however, to date, the difficulties encountered in implementing this project mean that it cannot be considered a full success.
The Sochi National Park and the Sochi Wildlife Refuge (named in the report as a Sochi All-Republican State Nature Reserve) form a single natural territory with the Caucasus Nature Reserve. The reduction of habitats due to the development of resorts can have a strong impact on populations inside the property, primarily large mammals. The number of West Caucasian tours and chamois in the reserve is currently significantly lower than that which was in the period of the 1970s and 80s. According to the staff of the Caucasus Reserve, this is due to the development of resorts in areas adjacent to the borders of the reserve: territories that used to be a buffer zone are actively being built up by tourist infrastructure facilities. Part of the new resort infrastructure is planned to be located close to the Turi Mountains, where, according to scientists of the Caucasus Reserve, 20% of the population of the West Caucasian tours is found. This is likely to have an impact on the continued decline of its population (IUCN Consultation, 2025). Further expansion of resort construction in the Mzymta valley will lead to a reduction in the range and population of the brown bear. In Sochi National Park, due to the resort construction in the Mzymta Valley, about 20 thousand hectares of bear habitats have already been irretrievably lost, including the most important autumn and winter stations for the species on the Aibga and Psekhako ridges. Road construction along the Mzymta River valley has made it impossible for bears to migrate back from Abkhazia to the Sochi Black Sea region. The number of bear populations in the Caucasus Reserve has not changed in recent years, but there has been an increase in the average population density, which indicates that bears are moving away from resort construction in the surrounding areas (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
The number of red deer in the peripheral areas of the reserve is decreasing. The situation is especially critical in the upper reaches of the Mzymta and Malaya Laba rivers, as well as in the Shahe Valley. Over the past few years, there has been a minimal number of male deer, and there are no females and juveniles. If the resort construction continues, negative changes will likely affect other local deer groups. This, in turn, may endanger the conservation of the entire red deer population (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
In addition, the Sochi National Park and the Sochi Wildlife Refuge are also extremely important for the restoration of the population of the Persian leopard.
- populations of large ungulates appear to be relatively stable and satisfactory according to the information provided by the State Party (eg: bison, thur, chamois, deer).
- populations of large carnivores have in some cases declined sharply, as have their respective ranges, which in most cases exceed the boundaries of the property at certain times of the year, for biological reasons (e.g. denning, reproduction).
For example, the intensive development of tourism in the Sochi region and construction, including in the SNP, in the recent years, has led to significant degradation and loss of habitats favourable to the brown bear (Ursus arctos meridionalis). This is particularly the case with the construction of the new road built in the early 2010s in the Mzymta valley and which has continued to develop ever since; according to the scientific literature, this infrastructure has disrupted the seasonal movements of large animals, including the brown bear, in an important wintering area for those species (Trepet, 2020).
The possible construction of new roads and other access routes in this valley and more widely within the area of the property (CSNBR) poses a significant risk of degrading its integrity, calling into question the property's values recognised under criterion (x) and also criterion (ix) of the Convention, on the basis of which it was inscribed on the World Heritage List.
Lastly, the reintroduction of the Persian leopard (Panthera pardus tuliana) into the property, as part of the compensatory measures for the impact of the 2014 Sochi Winter Olympics is still ongoing and could strengthen the ecological and biological values of the property; however, to date, the difficulties encountered in implementing this project mean that it cannot be considered a full success.
The Sochi National Park and the Sochi Wildlife Refuge (named in the report as a Sochi All-Republican State Nature Reserve) form a single natural territory with the Caucasus Nature Reserve. The reduction of habitats due to the development of resorts can have a strong impact on populations inside the property, primarily large mammals. The number of West Caucasian tours and chamois in the reserve is currently significantly lower than that which was in the period of the 1970s and 80s. According to the staff of the Caucasus Reserve, this is due to the development of resorts in areas adjacent to the borders of the reserve: territories that used to be a buffer zone are actively being built up by tourist infrastructure facilities. Part of the new resort infrastructure is planned to be located close to the Turi Mountains, where, according to scientists of the Caucasus Reserve, 20% of the population of the West Caucasian tours is found. This is likely to have an impact on the continued decline of its population (IUCN Consultation, 2025). Further expansion of resort construction in the Mzymta valley will lead to a reduction in the range and population of the brown bear. In Sochi National Park, due to the resort construction in the Mzymta Valley, about 20 thousand hectares of bear habitats have already been irretrievably lost, including the most important autumn and winter stations for the species on the Aibga and Psekhako ridges. Road construction along the Mzymta River valley has made it impossible for bears to migrate back from Abkhazia to the Sochi Black Sea region. The number of bear populations in the Caucasus Reserve has not changed in recent years, but there has been an increase in the average population density, which indicates that bears are moving away from resort construction in the surrounding areas (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
The number of red deer in the peripheral areas of the reserve is decreasing. The situation is especially critical in the upper reaches of the Mzymta and Malaya Laba rivers, as well as in the Shahe Valley. Over the past few years, there has been a minimal number of male deer, and there are no females and juveniles. If the resort construction continues, negative changes will likely affect other local deer groups. This, in turn, may endanger the conservation of the entire red deer population (IUCN Consultation, 2025).
In addition, the Sochi National Park and the Sochi Wildlife Refuge are also extremely important for the restoration of the population of the Persian leopard.
Herpetofauna
High Concern
Trend
Deteriorating
Caucasus is know as being an extremely important area for amphibians and reptiles.
According to recent scientific works (Tuniyev, B.S. and al., 2020), most species show a declining population trend due to mostly habitat loss and persecution, also water pollution. Of the 117 species of amphibians and reptiles (16 extant species of amphibians and 101 species of reptiles) that occur in the Caucasus, 108 have been assessed for extinction risk and included in the IUCN Red Listof Threatened Species. Twenty-three species (24 subspecies, 21.3%) were assessed as globally threatened(Vulnerable, Endangered and Critically Endangered). Assessments do not exist for several species that has been discovered in the recent past and almost all subspecies, with the exception of Testudo graeca nikolskii (European Reptile & Amphibian Specialist Group 1996) has not yet been assessed at all.
In the Caucasus Ecoregion, it is however estimated that conservation of amphibians and reptiles is reasonably effective in Nature Reserves and National Parks.
According to recent scientific works (Tuniyev, B.S. and al., 2020), most species show a declining population trend due to mostly habitat loss and persecution, also water pollution. Of the 117 species of amphibians and reptiles (16 extant species of amphibians and 101 species of reptiles) that occur in the Caucasus, 108 have been assessed for extinction risk and included in the IUCN Red Listof Threatened Species. Twenty-three species (24 subspecies, 21.3%) were assessed as globally threatened(Vulnerable, Endangered and Critically Endangered). Assessments do not exist for several species that has been discovered in the recent past and almost all subspecies, with the exception of Testudo graeca nikolskii (European Reptile & Amphibian Specialist Group 1996) has not yet been assessed at all.
In the Caucasus Ecoregion, it is however estimated that conservation of amphibians and reptiles is reasonably effective in Nature Reserves and National Parks.
Assessment of the current state and trend of World Heritage values
Deteriorating
The difficult accessibility of the area has ensured a good state of conservation of the ecosystems and biodiversity values until recently. The state of conservation of fauna biodiversity varies according to species; the status of most mammal populations is currently positive although showing some local declines (e.g. ungulates including bison, tur and chamois), while some are negative (e.g. brown bear). The conservation status of the avifauna appears to be satisfactory, while that of the herpetofauna seems to be deteriorating. As concluded in the 2020 outlook assessment, the degradation of some plant associations due to invasive alien species (e.g. Colchic boxwood, oak and chestnut forests) in and around the property, amplifies the property’s vulnerability and may affect the environmental processes that led to the inscription of the property under criterion (ix). Climate change is also having an impact on high mountain ecosystems and natural resources; in this context, water resources are under particular pressure from socio-economic development that is consuming more and more water. This pressure could increase still further with the development of tourism in general, and winter tourism in particular, if new large infrastructures construction and mass tourism were to be decided within the property and on its immediate surroundings.
Additional information
Wilderness and iconic features
Because of its difficult accessibility, the property has retained high wilderness values until the present. This also significantly contributes to its OUV and to its inscription on WH under criterion (x).
Outdoor recreation and tourism
As concluded in the 2020 outlook assessment, mountain tourism is currently practiced at a moderate intensity on site. If developed in a responsible way, the property may offer a unique opportunity to experience an undisturbed high-mountain landscape including its wildlife. However, this opportunity will be lost if large-scale infrastructure developments and mass tourism are carried out.
Importance for research
As stated in the 2020 outlook assessment, the property has contributed and still contribute significantly to the overall scientific kownledge and understanding of the Western Caucasus. If conserved effectively and managed properly, it may also provide one of a very few case studies of an undisturbed temperate forest/mountain ecosystem, which might also function as a reference for ecosystem restoration efforts elsewhere.
Collection of genetic material
As stated in the 2020 outlook assessment, the property hosts an exceptional diversity of endemic, relict and globally threatened plants species and communities (e.g. Lagonaki Plateau) that should be strictly protected and managed wisely; it may offer the possibility for collecting genetic material for a wide range of uses.
Although the property already offers multiple benefits to the local population and the global scientific and conservation community, the potential for a systematic and sustainable exploration and use of its various ecosystem services is not well addressed or wisely exploited currently. A sustainable management system at the whole property level, aiming at optimizing these services (e.g. nature-based tourism, knowledge building, water resources) may generate socioeconomic benefits far exceeding those of large scale tourism facilities driven by short-term economic interest and preserving in the long-term the environmental assets of the property.
| № | Organization | Brief description of Active Projects | Website |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | MNRE, Academy of science (IPEE RAS ; IEGT RAS, PIBR DFIC), FGBU SPNA, IUCN, EAZA | Reintroduction of persian leopard in Northern Caucasus |
References
| № | References |
|---|---|
| 1 |
Akatova, T and al. (2021) – Conservation value and problems of preserving the biota of the Lagonaki Highlands.
Current State and Prospects for the Conservation of Biological Resources: Global and Regional Processes materials of the All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference with international participation. Maykop, 2021. Publisher: Magarin O.G. Available at: https://www.elibrary.ru/item.asp?id=48686576 |
| 2 |
Akatova, T.V., et al. (2024) - Protected species of plants, fungi, and animals on the planned Lagonaki resort territory (Republic of Adygea): Current status and preservation problems. АКАТОВА, Т.В & АКАТОВА, Ю.С & РЕЗЧИКОВА, О.Н. (2023). ОХРАНЯЕМЫЕ ВИДЫ РАСТЕНИЙ ВЕРХОВИЙ Р. КУРДЖИПС (ЛАГОНАКСКОЕ НАГОРЬЕ, ЗАПАДНЫЙ КАВКАЗ). DOI 10.47370/978-5-00238-028-2-2023-16-24.
|
| 3 |
Gatti, R. C., Velichevskaya, A., Dudko, A., Fabbio, L., & Notarnicola, C. (2021). The smokescreen of Russian protected areas. Science of The Total Environment, 785, 147372.
|
| 4 |
Litvinskaya, S.A and all (2024) – Environmental problems in tourism development of mountain territories on the example of Lagonaki highlands (Western Caucasus) in Tourism and recreational complex in the system of regional development, XII International scientific and practical Conference, Krasnodar, 24-28 April 2024, pp 124-129.
|
| 5 |
Pogorelov A.V., Boyko E.S., Petrakov D.A., Kiselyov E.N. THE REACTION OF FISHT GLACIER (WESTERN CAUCASUS) TO CURRENT CLIMATE CHANGE. Proceedings of the International conference “InterCarto. InterGIS”. 2017;23(1):159–171 DOI: 10.24057/2414-9179-2017-1-23-159-171 (in Russian)
|
| 6 |
Pogorelov, A., Boyko, E., Netrebin, P. (2019) – Snow cover of the Lagonaki highlands (the Western Caucasus), Earth Sciences and Related Environmental Sciences Vol. 13 N° 1. 2019, pp 86-97. Available at: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/snezhnyy-pokrov-lagonaksk…
|
| 7 |
Pshegusov, R. H., Chadaeva, V. A., Taniya, I. V., Abramova, L. M., & Mustafina, A. N. (2019). Life strategies and the long-term climate-driven dynamics of the endemic Caucasian plant Fritillaria latifolia Willd. Uchenye Zapiski Kazanskogo Universiteta. Seriya Estestvennye Nauki, 161(4), 571-589.
|
| 8 |
Romeiro, J. M. N., Eid, T., Antón-Fernández, C., Kangas, A., & Trømborg, E. (2022). Natural disturbances risks in European Boreal and Temperate forests and their links to climate change–A review of modelling approaches. Forest Ecology and Management, 509, 120071.
|
| 9 |
State Party of the Russian Federation (2024). Report of the State Party to the World Heritage Committee on the state of conservation of Western Caucasus (Russian Federation). [online] Russian Federation, pp.1-7. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/900/documents/.
|
| 10 |
State Party of the Russian Federation. (2020). Report of the State Party to the World Heritage Committee on the state of conservation of Western Caucasus (Russian Federation). [online] State Party of the Russian Federation. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/900/documents/ [Accessed 5 March 2020].
|
| 11 |
Tuniyeva, B. S., Tarkhnishvilib, D., Aghasyanc, A. L., Bunyatovad, S. N., Kamalie, K., Mirghazanfarif, S. M., ... & Çiçekh, K. (2020). Amphibians and Reptiles of the Caucasus. SUPPLEMENTARY REPORTS, 83.
|
| 12 |
UNEP-WCMC (2011). The Western Caucasus, Russian Federation. UNEP-WCMC World Heritage Information Sheets. (electronic reference) < http://www.unep-wcmc.org/medialibrary/2011/06/28/a9f15ada/W…; accessed 20 June 2012.
|
| 13 |
UNESCO (2024). Report on the State of Conservation of Western Caucasus, Russian Federation. State of Conservation Information System of the World Heritage Centre. [online] Paris, France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre, pp.5. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/900/documents/
|
| 14 |
UNESCO and IUCN (2024). Report on the Joint World Heritage Centre – IUCN Reactive Monitoring Mission to Western Caucasus (Russian Federation), from 14 September to 22 September (2024). [not yet available online] Paris, France and Gland, Switzerland: UNESCO World Heritage Centre and IUCN
|
| 15 |
UNESCO. (2018). Report on the State of Conservation of Western Caucasus, Russian Federation. 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/3758 [Accessed 12 August 2019].
|
| 16 |
UNESCO. (2019). Report on the State of Conservation of Western Caucasus, Russian Federation. 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/3908 [Accessed 12 August 2019].
|
| 17 |
Urbanaviciene, I.N.and Urbanavicius, G.P. (2023) – Habitats of protected lichen species in the Republic of Adygea under threat of destruction, in Current state and problems of bioresources conservation, International Scientific and Practical Conference, Maikop, 24 November 2023, pp 147-153
|
| 18 |
World Heritage Committee (1999). World Heritage nomination documentation: The Western Caucasus. (online) Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/list/900/documents/. Accessed 20 June 2012.
|
| 19 |
World Heritage Committee (2023). Decision Decision 45 COM 7B.27. Western Caucasus (Russian Federation). In: Report of decisions of the 45th session of the World Heritage Committee (Riyadh, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia). [online] Paris, France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/8301
|
| 20 |
World Heritage Committee (2024). Decision 46 COM 7B.54. Western Caucasus (Russian Federation). In: Report of decisions of the 46th session of the World Heritage Committee (New Delhi, India). [online] Paris, France: UNESCO World Heritage Centre. Available at: https://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/8580
|