The Foz Tua Dam Project - ICOMOS . Summary and conclusions

Summary and conclusions

Regarding the proposal of the State Party as regards the creation of the Foz Tua Dam Development (FTDD) set in the cultural landscape of the Alto Douro Wine Region (ADWR), we can only but conclude that this will have an irreversible impact and threaten the OUV of the property.

1) The State Party’s statement that the transformation of the landscape proposed is identical to that which has already been experienced along the Douro valley, although evidently of a much smaller dimension
25 , cannot to be taken into account for past doings can in no way justify present actions.

2) The FTDD intervention area lies outside the WH property26: we have demonstrated above that this is not so, but that the area intervened affects fully the WH property.

3) The FTDD is not considered to be visually intrusive because the valley morphology will remain, whilst the “elegant shape of the Dam itself of broad/monumental scale, will create an impressive mark on the visual horizon of the observer, exposing land
uses that outline the scenery27 ”, that will attenuate all visual negative impact. We have demonstrated above that the building of the FTDD would mean a major impact on the ADWR which would imply a loss of its OUV, and serious threats to its authenticity and integrity.

4) The FTDD is considered to be “quite visually contained due to the physiographic and morphologic characteristics of this section of land in the Tua valley, thus granting a relatively restricted visual basin without causing any changes to the current land use in the largest proximity of the Douro River28 ”. Even if we might agree that this is so with the dam, all the other structures, including the lines for energy transportation that are still not represented in the plans, do impact most negatively on a wide area of the WH property, as demonstrated in the photomontages presented above.

5) The project contemplates a high number of mitigation and compensatory measures expected to compensate the environmental impacts of the FTDD, which aim to maintain environment in the Tua valley in good conditions and boost opportunities, namely in what concerns sustainable development in the region. Compensatory and potentiating measures for the region include the creation of projects that can maintain the memory of the cultural and natural heritage affected by the dam as well
as develop equipment to influence the economic development at local level (a museum in Foz Tua, a Regional Development Agency, and a Regional Natural Park). Compensatory measures, even if they have to be revised in the light of the Management Plan, are not the point, but rather if the FTDD should be built at all, as even The State Party says that “according to the results of the ecological and visual analysis the landscape presents a high value29”.

It is acknowledged that the State Party, together with EDP, has changed several times the project presented regarding the FTDD so as to reduce the impact detected in the Environmental Impact Assessment. However, as the Impact Assessment did not consider impact on cultural
heritage assets or on the attributes of OUV, the revised plans cannot, for all the reasons aforementioned, be considered to respect the landscape of the Alto Douro that has been inscribed on the World Heritage List. This section of the Tua Valley “has high scenic and
ecological values in relation to the cultural and biophysical parameters that characterize its structure and dynamics30 ”, all of which contribute towards OUV and the construction of the FTDD will impact adversely and irreversibly on the values of authenticity and integrity and OUV
of the property.

On the other hand, though we note the efforts made by the State Party in drafting a project to minimize the impacts of the FTDD, we believe that UNESCO Guidelines regarding “specific reports and impact studies each time exceptional circumstances occur” (par. 169 of the
Operational Guidelines), has not been followed as “notice should be given as soon as possible (for instance, before drafting basic documents for specific projects), and before making any decisions that would be difficult to reverse, so that the Committee may assist in seeking appropriate solutions to ensure that the OUV of the property is fully preserved” (par. 172).

Furthermore an impact assessment should be carried out to assess the potential impact of projects on the OUV of the property, in line with Guidance on Cultural Heritage Impact Assessments for World Heritage properties, 2011.

We consider that the State Party needs to review its National Programme of Dams for High Hydroelectric Power Potential taking into consideration when evaluating the possible 25 projects the heritage issues at stake, and any potential impact on a World Heritage site. Any other future dam development in the Douro basin included in this National Programme that might impact on the WH property should be equally revised.

b) A Retrospective Statement of OUV
This statement for the property should be prepared that can act as the basis for any futureimpact assessments.

c) Management Plan
The Management Plan handed in for the nomination of the property (2000) is not being put into action, because it is “a tool that hardly connects the public entities, as its guidelines to increase
efficacy lack transposition to the Municipal Director Plans in the scope of their revision procedures
which has been revealed as a particular slow procedure (as stated in the “The Foz Tua Hydrolectric Project and the Alto Douro Wine Region Cultural Landscape”, November 2010, handed in by the State Party").

Furthermore, in the specific case of the FTDD, it did not foresee the return to the projects of the dams especially after the events associated to the Coa dam that caused the suspension of work as a result of great archaeological discoveries. Therefore, the guidelines established in it are not being followed as it is considered non-operative and outdated. This means that, though the overall state of conservation is fine, this is so thanks to the guidance of other government bodies, to the private owners who are conscious of their heritage and by a sort of “conservation inertia”.

As long as there is no operative Management Plan and an agency enabled to put this into action, the conservation of the site is not effectively guaranteed. Therefore, the revision of the
Management Plan (bringing it up to date so that it really becomes a management tool) should be a priority, as well as creating a managerial office with competencies to direct it.