Hmm this has made me envious. I think grinding out these awkward visits are the ones I love the most (and the ones I'm least likely to do in the next few years).

Pouring over satalite maps of otherwise empty fields and forests trying to find a hint of a path.

Rock art sites look like a rich vein for this, maybe a return trip to Barcelona can should be scheduled to pick up some low hanging fruit and some barely identifiable paintings!

This 80-year-old woman did it, so it shouldn't be too hard: http://www.pascalblachier.com/2015/12/sentier-muletier-de-la-combe-darc-acces.html


Me too!


They are! Each one is like a mini-adventure! They don't always offer much to look at but I find them more rewarding than the more popular sites.


We're waiting for you, pal.

The buffer zone is not enough? :)
As esslots said the core zone is bigger than the own cave in any case

It's a pretty straightforward and easy hike, pretty much like the one to the closed entrance to Lascaux.

Strasbourg WHS's name?

In the WHS website use "Strasbourg, Grande-Île and Neustadt", but in this website the name is "Strasbourg: from Grande-île to Neustadt, a European urban scene"! We should change to reflect the official one, btw where those longish name come from?

That was the original official name of the extended nomination (see http://whc.unesco.org/archive/2017/whc17-41com-8B-en.pdf) .

But somehow they have dropped the last part, I'll change it as well

This is what actually happened -
a. It was ORIGINALLY nominated under the extended title but a change to that title took place DURING the evaluation process. The UNESCO Web site contains a series 6 of documents commencing with "Executive Summary" / "Résumé analytique" and concluding with "Supplementary information"/"Addendum" (See "Document tab" - http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/495/documents/ ). The first document has the original FULL name on its front page whilst the latter has adopted the SHORT Name! So - what happened in the time between the production of these documents?
b. The 5th Document, titled "Advisory Body interim report" is dated 16th Jan 2017 and consists of a letter from ICOMOS to the head of the French delegation to UNESCO on a number of matters. Its "subject" is given as the FULL name but it contains this section suggesting a "name change - "Titre du bien, Le sous-titre de la candidature. Le sous-titre de la candidature « une scène urbaine européenne » peut mener à des malentendus ; l'État partie est invité à réfléchir à d'autres sous-titres pour le bien proposé, ou à y renoncer"
c. the FINAL "supplementary information"/"Addendum" document is dated FEB 2017 is, in effect, a response to all the points raised by ICOMOS in the Jan 16th letter. It ALREADY adopts the SHORT Title and contains these sentences in response to the original request from ICOMOS and, in so doing, accepts a name change to remove the phrase questioned by ICOMOS - "Dans le sous-titre « une scène urbaine européenne », le mot scène permet d'exprimer soit le lieu, le cadre où a lieu une action, soit un moment, un contenu dans le déroulement de l'action. Cette ambivalence ne pouvant pas être facilement traduite du français vers d'autres langues, l'État-partie renonce à ce soustitre. Nouveau titre du bien proposé à l'inscription : « Strasbourg, Grande-Île et Neustadt. »" Don't you just LOVE the "reason" given!! Languages, other than French cannot easily express such subtle ideas/"ambivalences"!! The idea that Nomination Dossiers need to encompass such "poétique" concepts rather than precise unambiguous statements strikes me as very "French". As does the original "claim" in the Title to the "Europeanness" of Strasbourg - the response is solely about the use of the word "scene" rather than the entire phrase including the word "européenne" which seemed, to me at least, to have been the prime issue which ICOMOS was raising and about which it was fearing the possibility of "malentendus"!!
d. ALL further discussion on the Nomination took place using the short name - i.e the full and official AB report, the discussions at the WHC AND the decision to inscribe.

Funny that they allowed the poetic name in the case of Arc et Senans -- De la grande saline de Salins-les-Bains à la saline royale d'Arc-et-Senans, la production du sel ignigène, despite the English version become very strange.

Hi Durian - how are things?
I don't think that ICOMOS was that much concerned about the "poetic nature" of the original title - rather the implied claim about Strasboug's "preeminance" as a "European City". As the (official, albeit "part time") location of the European Parliament its European role is somewhat "controversial". See Wiki - "A final agreement was eventually reached by the European Council in 1992. It stated the Parliament would retain its formal seat in Strasbourg, where twelve sessions a year would be held, but with all other parliamentary activity in Brussels. This two-seat arrangement was contested by the Parliament, but was later enshrined in the Treaty of Amsterdam. To this day the institution's locations are a source of contention"
and (also Wiki)
"all votes of the European Parliament must take place in Strasbourg. "Additional" sessions and committees take place in Brussels. Although de facto a majority of the Parliament's work is now geared to its Brussels site, it is legally bound to keep Strasbourg as its official home."
So we have the time and money wasting charade of regular transfers of personnel across the year in order to "satisfy" France! Ah well, we in UK will soon be "out of it" - for better and worse!

Solivagant

Hi, Solivagant - fine as usual, ready for my Persian Gulf WHSs trip next week :)

Thanks Solivagant, for the very extensive review of the Pont d'Arc Cave!
https://www.worldheritagesite.org/list/id/1426#userreview_16169

I don't think you have left me with much (anything?) to write about after my visit which is planned for late November.

I am sure you will find something - what about that lovely French meal you are going to have!!
See what happens when you ask the guide to point out and explain the replica Venusian vulva - if it is there - I wasn't aware of the significance of that stalactite on my visit so can't say!

And how are you proposing to handle the "replica" v "core zone" visit issue???

I had also planned to visit both the replica cave and the original entrance, even already had looked up the directions.
But I will be there in late afternoon in November, so it gets dark relatively early. So maybe I will just make do with a view of the cliff.

I am of the opinion that to validate the visit of this site, it is necessary to touch the entrance of the real grotto, at the level of the armored door (could you be filmed) or of what surrounds it. Doing this allows you to be in touch with the core area. Visiting the replica completes well but is not sufficient on its own to claim to have an additional World Heritage site in its hunting board. I will not extend the debate to Stoclet and Surtsey... :)

I have heard some new findings about Surtsey from Iain Jackson during the last WH meetup. I'll post it in the Iceland topic.