WPC 2003: Ramsar Convention’s Montreux Record 1
Peter Bridgewater
The Ramsar Convention’s Montreux The Ramsar Convention’s Montreux Record:Record:
Recognising and addressing threats to Ramsar Recognising and addressing threats to Ramsar sitessites
Peter BridgewaterSecretary General, Ramsar Convention
World Parks Congress, Durban, September 2003
WPC 2003: Ramsar Convention’s Montreux Record 2
Peter Bridgewater
What is the “Ramsar” Convention on What is the “Ramsar” Convention on Wetlands?Wetlands?
• Oldest of the global environmental conventions
• covers very wide range of wetlands - from coral reefs to mountains
• 139 Contracting PartiesWhy the “Ramsar” Convention?• Ramsar, Iran - where Convention agreed
2 February 1971 by 18 countriesXX so not an acronym (RAMSAR) XX
WPC 2003: Ramsar Convention’s Montreux Record 3
Peter Bridgewater
Ramsar’s MissionRamsar’s Mission
“The conservation and wise use of wetlands through local, regional
and national actions and international cooperation as a contribution towards achieving
sustainable development throughout the world.”
(Strategic Plan 2003-2008)
WPC 2003: Ramsar Convention’s Montreux Record 4
Peter Bridgewater
What is the “wise use” of wetlands?What is the “wise use” of wetlands?
“… their sustainable
utilization for the benefit of
humankind in a way compatible
with the maintenance of
the natural properties of the
ecosystem”(Ramsar COP3, 1987)
WPC 2003: Ramsar Convention’s Montreux Record 5
Peter Bridgewater
Ramsar covers:Ramsar covers:• Natural and human-made wetlands• inland/freshwater:
– marshes, rivers, lakes, reservoirs etc.• coastal/marine
– Mangroves, lagoons, estuaries, coral reefs, seagrass beds etc.
• above ground and underground– karst and caves
• but not deep oceans
WPC 2003: Ramsar Convention’s Montreux Record 6
Peter Bridgewater
Contracting Parties’ commitments Contracting Parties’ commitments under the Ramsar Conventionunder the Ramsar Convention
Contracting Parties commit to delivering the Convention through 3 “pillars”:
• Wise use of all wetlands• Wetlands of International
Importance - designation and management
• International cooperation
WPC 2003: Ramsar Convention’s Montreux Record 7
Peter Bridgewater
The Ramsar Convention todayThe Ramsar Convention today
• 138 Contracting Parties– others in process of joining (accession)– from Africa, central Asia, Caribbean,
Oceania• 1308 Wetlands of International
Importance - “Ramsar sites” – totaling 110 million hectares – size: from <1 ha to >6 million ha
WPC 2003: Ramsar Convention’s Montreux Record 8
Peter Bridgewater
Reporting threats to Ramsar sites – Article Reporting threats to Ramsar sites – Article 3.23.2
• Article 3.2 of the Convention:“Each Contracting Party shall arrange to be informed at the earliest possible time if the ecological character of any wetland in its territory and included in the List has changed, is changing or is likely to change as the result of technological developments, pollution or other human interference. Information on such changes shall be passed without delay to the [Ramsar Bureau]”
Very few Parties have such mechanisms in place
WPC 2003: Ramsar Convention’s Montreux Record 9
Peter Bridgewater
Reporting threats to Ramsar sites – Reporting threats to Ramsar sites – Montreux RecordMontreux Record
• “Montreux Record” established in 1990 (COP4, Montreux, Switzerland)
• Record of “Ramsar sites where changes in ecological character have occurred, are occurring or are likely to occur”
• Operation procedures established by Parties in 1993 (COP5) and 1996 (COP6)
WPC 2003: Ramsar Convention’s Montreux Record 10
Peter Bridgewater
Reporting threats to Ramsar sites – Reporting threats to Ramsar sites – Montreux RecordMontreux Record
• Montreux Record purpose:• Primary mechanism for Parties to fulfill Article
3.2 obligation• “to identify priority sites for positive national
and international conservation attention”
Laguna de Llancanelo, Argentia – Montreux Record Listed 2001
WPC 2003: Ramsar Convention’s Montreux Record 11
Peter Bridgewater
Montreux Record procedureMontreux Record procedure• Contracting Party (CP) decides to include a
Ramsar site on the List– Submits short questionnaire about the
site and reasons for Listing to the Ramsar Bureau
– Bureau inscribes site on the Record• After addressing the threat(s), CP requests
removal from List– Submits further short questionnaire
describing actions taken and removal of threat(s)
– Removal subject to advice from Scientific & Technical Review Panel
WPC 2003: Ramsar Convention’s Montreux Record 12
Peter Bridgewater
• To provide advice on dealing with the identified threat(s), the CP can request the Bureau to undertake a “Ramsar Advisory Mission (RAM)”
• 51 RAMs have been undertaken• RAM reports available on
http://www.ramsar.org/index_ram.htm
Prespa Lakes, Greece – removed from Montreux Record 1999
WPC 2003: Ramsar Convention’s Montreux Record 13
Peter Bridgewater
Montreux Record – has it helped?Montreux Record – has it helped?• Only 76 Ramsar sites have been Montreux
Record listed• Many more known to face threats to ecological
character (Article 3.2)• 23 sites removed from Record• 1 site removed and then added again for other
reasons• 55 sites currently on the Record• Many sites on List for >8 years
– 32 Listed in 1990– 14 Listed in 1993– Only 6 sites Listed since 1996
WPC 2003: Ramsar Convention’s Montreux Record 14
Peter Bridgewater
• Long period of site on List – indication either of:– Lack of action after Listing to solve
problems, and/or– Listing sites with especially
intransigent problems• Has not fulfilled original intent of primary
mechanism for reporting and addressing change in ecological character
• Seen by some countries as a ‘black-list’ of sites suffering poor management and failure to implement Convention commitments
WPC 2003: Ramsar Convention’s Montreux Record 15
Peter Bridgewater
But• MR remains valuable tool for Convention
Used chiefly by Parties to draw attention to v. difficult problems with a Site
• Especially when action could benefit from international conservation attention:– e.g. through a RAM– Independent advice from international
experts as ‘honest brokers’ between protagonists
• Party’s efforts to implement RAM advice often substantive
WPC 2003: Ramsar Convention’s Montreux Record 16
Peter Bridgewater
Montreux Record – RAM exampleMontreux Record – RAM example• Chilika Lake India• Listed on MR 1993• RAM (2001) to advise
on progress in implementing management action
• Major profiling of Convention support with local communities
• Led to removal of site from MR in 2002
• Chilika Development Authority - Winner of 2002 Ramsar Award
WPC 2003: Ramsar Convention’s Montreux Record 17
Peter Bridgewater
Montreux Record – the futureMontreux Record – the futureRamsar COP8 (2002) • recognised continuing value of Montreux
Record• Stressed several response options exist for
dealing with adverse change to Ramsar sites: Using established management planning
process• But only 20% of Ramsar sites have this in place
Seeking STRP advice Requesting funding Listing on MR and requesting Ramsar Advisory
Mission for international advice
WPC 2003: Ramsar Convention’s Montreux Record 18
Peter Bridgewater
Montreux Record – the futureMontreux Record – the futureRamsar COP8 stressed that Montreux
Record is particularly useful when: Demonstrating national commitment would
help resolve the problem Highlighting very serious cases would be
beneficial at national and/or international level Positive national & international conservation
attention would benefit the site and/or Inclusion on the MR would help guide
allocation of resources from financial mechanisms (e.g. GEF)
WPC 2003: Ramsar Convention’s Montreux Record 19
Peter Bridgewater
In conclusionIn conclusion• Montreux Record is important tool for
Parties of Ramsar Convention to help resolve threats to Ramsar sites
• Parties should always report a threat to the ecological character of a Ramsar site
• On each occasion, Parties should List the site on the Montreux Record – if Listing would help resolve the threat
Oasis de Ouled Saïd, Algeria – Montreux Record Listed 2001
