When You Should Not Make Changes To World Heritage Sites USA


world heritage sites usa

America has been trying to steal the World Heritage status from France ever since the French decided to add the USA to their list of World Heritage sites. This happened in 1990, when the Clinton Administration included the USA in the World Heritage List. At that time, France had only three World Heritage Sites, compared to the twenty-two World Heritage Sites that France has today. At that time, France had a World Heritage Site in Toulouse, as well as a World Heritage Site at La Bordeaux and a World Heritage Site at Tours de la Meuse. At that time, neither of these sites had a fountain or a fireplace.

Heritage Designation For World Heritage Sites USA

A large stone building with a mountain in the background

In order for the US to have its own World Heritage Site, it is required to add the United States to the list of nations that have World Heritage Sites. After this designation, it becomes possible for the US to get additional funding for preserving the sites. When President Obama proposed the Embargo Act, which made possible for the US to get additional funding for its National Park Service, it was rejected by Congress, mainly due to the objections raised by various industries. The Embargo Act was never passed. Nevertheless, President Obama was able to convince Congress to pass the measure, thereby giving the US the World Heritage designation it so desperately needs.

Today, the US has eleven World Heritage sites, all of which are located within the boundaries of the US: the Caribbean Islands, the Bahamas, Central America, the Great Barrier Reef, the Grand Canyon, the Norwegianotes, Pacific Ocean, the Seychelles, South Pacific, the Victoria Islands, and the Tuvalu. These world heritage sites include beaches, rock pools, coral islands, rain forests, mangrove forests, tropical rainforest, the tsunami devastated areas, and tree-studded rice fields. Some of the natural sites include the American Indian Cultural Center in New Orleans, Crater Lake National Park, Cabeza de Vaca National Park, Florida Red Sea beaches, Hawaii’s Lanai Gorge, Kentucky Mountain Bird Sanctuary, Maui’s King’s Rock, Yosemite, Snake River, Tarzan’s River, and Wall Street.

Approval Of Councils

A group of people sitting on a rock near the ocean

The World Heritage Sites Act of 1996 is an act that redesigns the entire National Parks System. Under the Act, the Secretary of the Interior is authorized and directed to take such actions as may be necessary to prepare and establish guidelines for the protection of the world heritage sites and to define or expand upon existing functions or programs of the Service. This Act also lays down procedures for managing the World Heritage sites. Moreover, it gives the Secretary of the Interior the power to remove or restore, condition, restrict, or prohibit the use of a park for any purpose related to the World Heritage designation. The Act also provides for the listing of additional natural sites not protected under the National Parks Act.

When it comes to the process of requesting the New York City Council to modify a site’s status, there are a number of things to consider. As you can imagine, it would be difficult to convince New York City to withdraw a designation, which has been given by one of the largest international agencies in the world. However, the Council may be willing to rethink the way it has handled approvals. For example, the last twenty years have seen a steady decline in visitation at sites across the system. Even if no one is currently seeking a change in the location of a World Heritage Site, there may be a change in future years that changes the circumstances of approval.

Problems Of Overcrowding

It is possible to influence the decision to remove or modify a site by appealing to multiple stakeholders, which is what can be done by working with the world heritage sites authorities in your area. There are local offices who have been involved in the planning and management of several of the parks in the region. By asking these officials for their input regarding the best time to remove a World Heritage Site, you can begin to make the argument to change the inscription on your Chaco culture national historical park. If there are problems with overcrowding at Chaco Canyon National Monument due to the high number of tourists over the past twenty years, then you can explain why it is not appropriate to place a monument in that location. Your official involvement with this process shows your interest in a well-managed park, and that you value its protection.

Some US world heritage sites that have recently had an inscription removed include the Chaco Canyon, Yucca Mountain, and Mauna Loa. Yucca Mountain, which is located near Carlsbad, NM, was removed in 2020 because of concerns about its removal from the World Heritage list. While no one has claimed jurisdiction over the Yucca Mountain project, the US removed the site because it posed a threat to the Mauna Loa volcano and its surroundings.

Final Words

You might choose to remove another US world heritage site, such as the Grand Teton Park, if you live in Utah. Because the Grand Teton Park and the Everglades National Park were placed on the National Register of Historic Places in the 1970s, they should have their protections restored before they ever lost their significance. You might also choose to remove other sites, although you should consider the time periods they represent and the level of protection they require, as you make your final decision.

Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter