Los Glaciares National Park

Argentina
Inscribed in
1981
Criteria
(vii)
(viii)

The Los Glaciares National Park is an area of exceptional natural beauty, with rugged, towering mountains and numerous glacial lakes, including Lake Argentino, which is 160 km long. At its farthest end, three glaciers meet to dump their effluvia into the milky grey glacial water, launching massive igloo icebergs into the lake with thunderous splashes.
© UNESCO

Summary

2017 Conservation Outlook

Finalised on
10 Nov 2017
Good with some concerns
Under the World Heritage Convention, Los Glaciares National Park is specifically recognized for its exceptional scenic beauty and the impressive display of ongoing and major glaciations and related phenomena. Due to the nature of these conservation values, the large scale of the property and the remoteness of, and difficult access to, vast parts of the property there is a high degree of natural protection. The conservation status and prospects are thus good from a World Heritage perspective. However, there are some concerns about mass tourism seasonally reaching excessive levels with tourism infrastructure starting to affect the landscape beauty despite location outside of the property for the most part. At all times, introduced species of flora and fauna have been having impacts on the ecosystem, with feral cattle being one of the more obvious examples. Fire management, law enforcement as regards poaching and tourism planning and management leave much room for improvement. Moreover, hydropower dam construction outside the property could result in important impacts in the property, if it were to proceed.

Current state and trend of VALUES

Low Concern
Trend
Deteriorating
The overall concern is ranked low from a narrow World Heritage perspective as neither the grandeur of the landscape nor its extraordinary geological values are significantly threatened. Nevertheless, steady tourism growth in the absence of adequate planning and management (Despouy, 2015) has been resulting in a deteriorating trend.

Overall THREATS

High Threat
The above noted combination of a range of current threats, such as the effects of past livestock grazing, introduced plants and mammals, feral livestock, climate change, fires and poorly controlled tourism development and poaching have been causing significant and ongoing impacts on the steppes and forests. Nonetheless, the current threats remain limited from the perspective of the specifically recognized World Heritage values. However, hydropower development poses a high, even if still potential, threat as it might directly affect the iconic Argentina Lake, if it were to proceed.

Overall PROTECTION and MANAGEMENT

Some Concern
Similar to the above, protection and management of the national park has some deficits in terms of lacking strategic planning, an outdated management plan and a lack of adequate public use planning and management despite growing mass tourism in some parts of the property (Administración de Parques Nacionales, 2015). Nevertheless, it is important to understand that large areas of the property are remote and hardly accessible and thereby naturally protected. Challenges remain in terms of the restoration of areas impacted by past livestock and fires, current fire management, law enforcement and tourism management.

Full assessment

Click the + and - signs to expand or collapse full accounts of information under each topic. You can also view the entire list of information by clicking Expand all on the top left.

Finalised on
10 Nov 2017

Description of values

Exceptional natural beauty modeled by ongoing glaciation

Criterion
(vii)
Los Glaciares National Park is situated in the Argentine part of Southern Patagonia. The landscape is modeled by longstanding and ongoing glaciation against the backdrop of some of the most spectacular Andean peaks, such as the Fitz Roy (Chaltén) and the Torre. Extensive glacial lakes, such as the renowned Argentino and Viedma Lakes, contrast with massive glaciers fed by some of the largest inland ice fields in the world (World Heritage Committee, 2014; UNEP-WCMC, 2011). The natural beauty attracts visitors from around the world.

Geological, geomorphic and physiographic phenomenon caused by the advance and retreat of the glaciations

Criterion
(viii)
Los Glaciares National Park owes its name to the countless glaciers covering roughly half of the property. The vast South Patagonian Ice Field, the most extensive South American relict of the glaciological processes of the Quaternary Period feeds many of these glaciers, while there are also impressive glaciers independent of the main ice field. The property is thereby an outstanding example of geological, geomorphic and physiographic phenomena caused by dynamic glaciation during the Pleistocene epoch of the Quaternary, as well as ongoing neoglaciations in the Holocene (World Heritage Committee, 2014; UNEP-WCMC, 2011). These events have modeled the landscape and may be recognised by the lacustrine basins of glacial origin, the moraine systems deposited on the plateaux, or by more recent systems pertaining to the current valleys with its spectacular glacier tongues. The arguably most spectacular visual feature are several glaciers calving into the icy and milky waters of the huge Lake Argentino. These include the famous Perito Moreno Glacier, which blocks a narrow channel formed by Lake Argentino thereby temporarily raising the water level. This in turn causes regular thunderous ruptures of the glacier tongue into the lake (World Heritage Committee, 2014).
Natural forests and steppes with noteworthy fauna and flora
While better known for its extraordinary scenic beauty and striking glaciation, Los Glaciares boasts a remarkable landscape diversity encompassing a large altitudinal gradient of more than 3,000 metres and very diverse ecosystems. The property is in particular noteworthy for its forests and steppes. The forests are dominated by various species of Southern Beech (Nothofagus sp.). Charismatic mammals include puma (Puma concolor) and the elusive and endangered Patagonian huemul or South Andean deer (Hippocamelus bisulcus). The avifauna includes the iconic Andean condor (Vultur gryphus, NT), the torrent duck (Merganetta armata, LC) in the fast-flowing clear mountain creeks, and the charismatic Magellanic woodpecker (Campephilus magellanicus, LC) (World Heritage Committee, 2014).
Massive freshwater reservoir
The property is part of an enormous, largely pristine freshwater reservoir comprised of vast ice fields and glaciers on both sides of the international border between Argentina and Chile (World Heritage Committee, 2014; UNEP-WCMC, 2011).

Assessment information

Low Threat
From a conventional protected area perspective, the national park faces considerable threats despite the relatively remote location and sparse population density of Southern Patagonia. Intensive past livestock grazing, introduced plants and mammals, feral livestock, climate change, fires and poorly controlled tourism development and poaching have caused significant impacts on the steppes and forests, parts of which were described as severely degraded even in the nomination dossier (State Party of Argentina, 1981). As the property has been inscribed specifically for the extraordinary landscape beauty and the glaciation as a geological phenomenon, the World Heritage concerns are less severe and thus assessed as a low threat.
Livestock Farming / Grazing
Data Deficient
Inside site
, Extent of threat not known
Outside site
Cattle and sheep grazing have been modifying the native steppes and forests long before the World Heritage inscription (State Party of Argentina, 1981) with detrimental effects on native flora and fauna. While some areas have since been naturally recovering, pressure continues to exist, including in some areas from feral cattle (World Heritage Committee, 2014).
Invasive Non-Native/ Alien Species
High Threat
Inside site
, Widespread(15-50%)
Outside site
Non-native species include exotic plants on formerly grazed land (State Party of Argentina, 1981), as well as European hare, feral cattle, horses, sheep, dogs and cats; rainbow and lake trout; alien species have had a significant effect in altering native habitats, and competing with local species, but there has been some recuperation of native habitats and local species in recent years (BirdLife International, 2017; UNEP-WCMC, 2011; State Party of Argentina, 1981; IUCN, 1981).
Habitat Shifting/ Alteration
Very High Threat
Inside site
, Throughout(>50%)
Outside site
Climate change is causing the majority of the glaciers in the national park to recede with the notable exception of the Perito Moreno Glacier which continues to grow. Higher summer temperatures coinciding with decreasing precipitation increases the vulnerability of native steppes and forests to wildfires (World Heritage Committee, 2014).
Tourism/ Recreation Areas
High Threat
Inside site
, Localised(<5%)
Outside site
Annual visitor numbers have been exceeding half a million in recent years (Administración de Parques Nacionales, 2015), compared to less than 80,000 in the early 1990s (UNEP-WCMC, 2011). Even though infrastructure expansion has for the most part been occurring outside the property, the visual impacts are striking nevertheless (UNEP-WCMC, 2011). Recent audits have suggested a major mismatch between tourism growth and corresponding planning and management (Auditoría General de la Nación, 2015; Despouy, 2015).
Hunting (commercial/subsistence)
Low Threat
Inside site
, Extent of threat not known
Outside site
Historically, there has been intense hunting of puma, fox and guanaco. Ranches continue to operate in the surroundings of the property and both retaliation killings of predators and poaching of guanaco continues to be reported (IUCN, 2014). This is a low threat from a World Heritage perspective due to the focus on landscape beauty and geological values. From an ecosystem conservation perspective the manipulation of the populations of predators and a large native herbivore are significant threats.
High Threat
Construction of hydropower dams on the Santa Cruz River, which originates in the property, would fundamentally modify one of the last free-flowing major rivers in Argentine Patagonia and possibly affect the iconic Lago Argentino. As elsewhere in Patagonia, demand for real estate for secondary homes, investment or tourism development is high and rising and could further impact on the property's exceptional natural beauty. Given the uncertainty of the status of planning and the likelihood of definitive approval hydropower development is ranked as data deficient. Real estate development is a more tangible threat, yet it is mostly restricted to outside of the property and not likely to directly affect the specific World Heritage values.
Dams/ Water Management or Use
High Threat
Outside site
Past plans to construct a hydropower dam on the La Leona River caused concerns about the water level of Lago Viedma and anticipated habitat changes to sensitive habitats along its shore (BirdLife International, 2017). In 2012, the hydropower plans on the La Leona River appear to have been abandoned (IUCN, 2014). There is, however, ongoing and major concern about planned construction of major dams on the still free-flowing Santa Cruz River, sometimes referred to as the Kirchner-Cepernic hydropower complex. While outside of the property, the reservoir could reach into the property according to some scenarios, thereby affecting the level of the iconic Argentino Lake and consequently both sensitive aquatic and coastal habitats but also one of the major tourism attractions. The controversial plans have caught considerable public and media attention in and beyond Argentina. The plans are subject to environmental impact assessment with final decision-making pending at the time of writing.
Housing/ Urban Areas,
Tourism/ Recreation Areas
Low Threat
Outside site
Real estate development in the contiguous national reserve, which serves as a de facto buffer zone, is an increasing risk due to the tourism boom and demand for secondary homes in Patagonia. In addition to conversion of habitat and disturbance (BirdLife International, 2017), there can be important visual impacts. The threat is ranked as low, as it does not directly impact on the natural values specifically recognized for under the World Heritage Convention.
The above noted combination of a range of current threats, such as the effects of past livestock grazing, introduced plants and mammals, feral livestock, climate change, fires and poorly controlled tourism development and poaching have been causing significant and ongoing impacts on the steppes and forests. Nonetheless, the current threats remain limited from the perspective of the specifically recognized World Heritage values. However, hydropower development poses a high, even if still potential, threat as it might directly affect the iconic Argentina Lake, if it were to proceed.
Relationships with local people
Some Concern
There is some tension between nature conservation and tourism development which at times results in conflicts between the national management agency APN and actors at the provincial and local level. Similarly, livestock husbandry on adjacent private land regularly causes conflict when livestock enters the national park (Administración de Parques Nacionales, 1997). In 2002, a local Advisory Commission was established made up of representatives of national, provincial and municipal entities, NGOs, the Chamber of Commerce, the Association of Tourist Guides, a Scout Group and others. This commission provides advice to the national park on various management issues (World Heritage Committee, 2014).
Legal framework
Effective
Los Glaciares National Park is a unit of the National System of Protected Areas in Argentina (Law No. 22.351). Created in 1937 (Law No. 13.895) its current boundaries were defined in 1971 (National Law No. 19.292), including the division of the area into a national park and a national reserve, as is common on Argentina (World Heritage Committee, 2014).
Enforcement
Some Concern
Ongoing reports of some poaching are one example of indications of limited law enforcement capacity.
Integration into regional and national planning systems
Some Concern
The national park is an integral part of the national protected system and the local Advisory Commission provides a mechanism for regular consultations with provincial and local authorities since 2002, which is one mechanism to harmonize the various governmental levels involved in the management of the land in and around the property (World Heritage Committee, 2014). There is a need to harmonize management with adjacent private ranches.
Management system
Some Concern
A preliminary management plan for the national park developed in 1997 (Administración de Parques, 1997) has been in the process of being updated over 20 years at the time of writing. Recent audits have strongly criticized the quality of strategic and operational management planning (Auditoría General de la Nación, 2015; Despouy, 2015).
Management effectiveness
Serious Concern
A 2011 internal evaluation cited in Auditoría General de la Nación (2015) notes that the effectiveness of most management areas was evaluated as just or not satisfactory (Auditoría General de la Nación, 2015; Despouy, 2015).
Implementation of Committee decisions and recommendations
Data Deficient
Committee decisions have not articulated concrete requests or recommendations implying follow-up on the part of the State Party.
Boundaries
Some Concern
The national park boundaries have been in place for decades and are known to local inhabitants (World Heritage Committee, 2014). There are some legal question marks surrounding the exact legal land tenure status of the El Chaltén settlement within the property, as well as about the jurisdiction of some other, relatively small areas within the property (Auditoría General de la Nación, 2015).
Sustainable finance
Data Deficient
No independent information is available on the adequacy of the budget allocated by the national government. Options to take advantage of the substantial revenues from seasonal mass tourism as a contribution to diversified conservation financing mechanisms deserve to be analyzed.
Staff training and development
Effective
Argentina has an advanced curriculum development for rangers considered exemplary in the region. Staff have access to occasional in-service training opportunities. Seasonal staff complements the team in the peak tourism season.
Sustainable use
Some Concern
The major use of the national park is tourism, the management of which has some deficits and is not in line with the large and increasing visitor numbers in the summer of the Southern Hemisphere (Auditoría General de la Nación, 2015; Despouy, 2015; UNEP-WCMC, 2011; Martin et al., 2001).
Education and interpretation programs
Effective
Assisted by local organizations the national park administration has developed and implements educational programs.
Tourism and visitation management
Some Concern
Highly seasonal tourism is the major use of the national park with annual visitor number regularly exceeding half a million over the last years (Administración de Parques Nacionales, 2015). Infrastructure (hotels, lodges, campgrounds, hiking and horse trails, mountain huts, tour boat and glacier hike facilities) is well developed. However, there are some deficits in the management of the balance between nature conservation and tourism promotion (UNEP-WCMC, 2011). Auditoría General de la Nación (2015) noted an absence of up-to-date and approved public use plans.
Monitoring
Some Concern
Monitoring is restricted to the status of glaciers as part of a national inventory effort and selected criteria, such as the status of the endangered huemul deer. No comprehensive monitoring program is in place (IUCN, 2014; UNEP-WCMC, 2011).
Research
Some Concern
Regular studies of the glaciers are conducted as part of a national governmental effort in addition to a wealth of academic research, much of which is published in peer-reviewed journals. Partial inventories of fauna exist, with a focus on birds (see for example BirdLife, 2017) and longstanding work of the endangered huemul deer within a national programme dedicated to this species recognized as a "national monument" in Argentina. While there are neither integrated, on-going research programs for the national park nor research facilities, a Regional Office of the National Parks Administration provides scientific support for management (World Heritage Committee, 2014; UNEP-WCMC, 2011).
Similar to the above, protection and management of the national park has some deficits in terms of lacking strategic planning, an outdated management plan and a lack of adequate public use planning and management despite growing mass tourism in some parts of the property (Administración de Parques Nacionales, 2015). Nevertheless, it is important to understand that large areas of the property are remote and hardly accessible and thereby naturally protected. Challenges remain in terms of the restoration of areas impacted by past livestock and fires, current fire management, law enforcement and tourism management.
Assessment of the effectiveness of protection and management in addressing threats outside the site
Some Concern
The National Park Administration is responsible for the management of both the actual national park and the adjacent national reserve effectively serving as a buffer zone despite not formally being recognized as such under the World Heritage Convention. In line with recent, critical audits (Auditoría General de la Nación, 2015; Despouy, 2015), the persistence of all major severe threats at a time of increasing tourism pressure suggests a limited management effectiveness.
Best practice examples
One of the adjoining privately owned ranches (estancias) has been recognized as an Important Bird Area by BirdLife International (2017). A conservation management plan for the estate turns it into to a de facto extension of - or buffer zone for - the national park. Several non-governmental organizations support the initiative. The initiative serves as an example of biodiversity-friendly management of private land adjacent to governmental protected areas (UNEP-WCMC, 2011).
World Heritage values

Exceptional natural beauty modeled by ongoing glaciation

High Concern
Trend
Deteriorating
The natural beauty of the property has been affected by the receding glaciers with the notable exception of the Perito Moreno Glacier which continues to advance. Impacts on the natural forest and steppe vegetation and endangered species partially predating the World Heritage inscription stem from past sheep and cattle grazing, feral livestock and exotic species like European hare, wildfires, and uncontrolled tourism development in the buffer zone (BirdLife International, 2017; UNEP-WCMC, 2011; State Party of Argentina, 1981). There is some concern that planned downstream dam construction on the Santa Cruz River could affect the lake levels in the property and thereby the visually stunning phenomenon of the calving of the Perito Moreno glacier (Aves Argentinas, 2016).

Geological, geomorphic and physiographic phenomenon caused by the advance and retreat of the glaciations

Low Concern
Trend
Stable
It can be argued that climate change casts a shadow on the future of glaciation as protected today. At the same time, glaciation has been dynamic at all times and the current status represents a geological snapshot only.
Assessment of the current state and trend of World Heritage values
Low Concern
Trend
Deteriorating
The overall concern is ranked low from a narrow World Heritage perspective as neither the grandeur of the landscape nor its extraordinary geological values are significantly threatened. Nevertheless, steady tourism growth in the absence of adequate planning and management (Despouy, 2015) has been resulting in a deteriorating trend.
Assessment of the current state and trend of other important biodiversity values
Low Concern
Trend
Stable
The natural steppe and forest vegetation was in a degraded state even at the time of World Heritage inscription from fires and livestock grazing (State Party of Argentina, 1981). Despite partial natural recovery, tourism pressure, exotic species, feral livestock and fires continue to put pressure on flora and fauna (UNEP-WCMC, 2011). In the context of the reservoir values, despite concerns about anticipated impacts from climate change, the ice fields and glaciers continue to constitute a major and high-quality freshwater reservoir.

Additional information

Outdoor recreation and tourism,
Natural beauty and scenery
The national park attracts and inspires more than half a million of tourists per year. The latest available figures are 580,720 (2013) and 666,340 (2014) visitors, an almost 15% increase between just these two years (Administración de Parques Nacionales, 2015).
Fishing areas and conservation of fish stocks,
Livestock grazing areas
Regulated, recreational fishing takes place, but plays no meaningful role in food provision. Large areas of what is today the national park and property were grazed by sheep and cattle, the feral cattle still living in the property being one reminder (State Party of Argentina, 1981).
Sacred natural sites or landscapes,
Wilderness and iconic features
The iconic peaks of Fitz Roy or Chaltén and Torre attract climbers and other outdoor enthusiasts from around the world. The name Chaltén is of indigenous origin; the highest peak of the area Chaltén continues to be considered a sacred mountain in indigenous cosmovision.
Importance for research
The massive glaciers and ice fields of Patagonia are subject to important research, including on climate change (Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas, n.d.).
Water provision (importance for water quantity and quality)
The vast transboundary ice fields and glaciers are a major freshwater reservoir (UNEP-WCMC, 2011).
Tourism-related income,
Provision of jobs
Park management and, more importantly, tourism generates income and employment opportunities (UNEP-WCMC, 2011).
Besides globally significant conservation values under the World Heritage Convention, the property conserves - and permits the natural regeneration of - important remnants of Patagonian forests and steppes. Water stands out as an overarching environmental service and benefit whereas tourism has developed into a pillar of the local economy.
Organization/ individuals Project duration Brief description of Active Projects
1 National Parks Administration of Argentina (APN) From: 2017
To: 2017
Programme dedicated to the conservation of the endangered huemul deer (Hippocamelus bisulcus), which includes coordination and exchange with neighboring Chile (Programa de Conservación del Huemul).
2 LANIGLA-CONICET From: 2017
To: 2017
Monitoring of the property's glaciers takes place as part of the national inventory system.
Site need title Brief description of potential site needs Support needed for following years
1 Improved tourism management Despite tourism being a major and increasing factor in the management equation of the property, planning and management have been assessed as very limited in the recent past (Despouy, 2015). From: 2017
To: 2017
2 Removal of feral cattle A number of exotic and feral species affect the vulnerable steppes and forests. While some are difficult and perhaps impossible to remove, the removal of cattle appears feasible and desirable. From: 2017
To: 2017

References

References
1 Administración de Parques Nacionales (APN). 2015. Informe anual de visitantes a las Áreas Protegidas 2014. Dirección de Aprovechamiento de Recursos.
2 Administración de Parques Nacionales. 1997. Parque Nacional Los Glaciares. Plan Preliminar de Manejo. <https://www.sib.gov.ar/archivos/PlanManejoPNLGCompleto.pdf&…;. Accessed 15 May 2017.
3 Administración de Parques Nacionales. 2002. Plan Nacional de Conservación y Reuperación del Huemul (Hippocamelus bisulcus) en Argentina. <http://www.cean.gob.ar/wp-content/uploads/2016/09/Plan-Naci…;. Accessed 15 May 2017.
4 Auditoría General de la Nación. 2015. Implementación de los Planes de Manejo de las Áreas Naturales Protegidas (AP) de la Ecorregión Bosque Patagónico - Patagonia Sur. Administración de Parques Nacionales (APN), Ministerio de Turismo. Auditoría de Gestión. Período analizado: Año 2011 –- primer semestre 2013. <https://www.agn.gov.ar/files/informes/2015_030info.pdf&gt;. Accessed 15 May 2017.
5 Aves Argentinas. 2016. Posición institucional de Aves Argentinas respecto del proyecto de construcción del complejo hidroeléctrico Kirchner-Cepernic sobre el río Santa Cruz, provincia de Santa Cruz. BirdLife International. <http://www.avesargentinas.org.ar/noticia/posici%C3%B3n-inst…;. Accessed 15 May 2017.
6 BirdLife International. 2017. Important Bird Areas factsheet: Parque Nacional Los Glaciares y adyacencias (Estancias El Sosiego, La Soledad y Anita). <http://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/parque-nacional…;. Accessed 15 May 2017.
7 Consejo Nacional de Investigaciones Científicas y Técnicas (CONICET). n.d. Inventario Nacional de Glaciares. <http://www.glaciaresargentinos.gob.ar/&gt;. Accessed 15 May 2017.
8 Despouy, L. 2015. Una década al cuidado de los fondos públicos. Informe sectorial del Presidente de la Auditoría General de la Nación. 5. Gestión ambiental. Auditoría General de la Nación. Argentina. <http://leandrodespouy.com/informes/GestionAmbiental.pdf&gt;. Accessed 15 May 2017.
9 IUCN. 1981. World Heritage Nomination – IUCN Technical Evaluation, Los Glaciares National Park (Argentina). Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. <http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/145/documents/&gt;. Accessed 15 May 2017.
10 IUCN. 2014. Los Glaciares National Park Site Assessment (Argentina). The IUCN World Heritage Outlook. <http://www.worldheritageoutlook.iucn.org/search-sites/-/wdp…;. Accessed 15 May 2017.
11 Martin, C.E.; Chehébar, C. 2001. The national parks of Argentinian Patagonia - management policies for conservation, public use, rural settlements,
and indigenous communities. Journal of the Royal Society of New Zealand 31(4): 845-864. <http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/03014223.2001.95…;. Accessed 15 May 2017.
12 State Party of Argentina. 1981. World Heritage Nomination Los Glaciares (Argentina) <http://whc.unesco.org/en/list/145/documents/&gt;. Accessed 15 May 2017.
13 UNEP-WCMC. 2011. Los Glaciares National Park, Argentina. UNEP-WCMC World Heritage Information Sheets. Cambridge, UK.
14 UNESCO, IUCN. 1986. Report on the State of Conservation of Los Glaciares National Park, Argentina. State of Conservation Information System of the World Heritage Centre. <http://whc.unesco.org/en/soc/1554&gt;. Accessed 15 May 2017.
15 UNESCO. 1985. Report on the State of Conservation of Los Glaciares National Park, Argentina. State of Conservation Information System of the World Heritage Centre. <http://whc.unesco.org/en/soc/1538&gt;. Accessed 15 May 2017.
16 UNESCO. 1986. Report on the State of Conservation of Los Glaciares National Park, Argentina. State of Conservation Information System of the World Heritage Centre. <http://whc.unesco.org/en/soc/1554&gt;. Accessed 15 May 2017.
17 World Heritage Committee. 2012. Decision: 36 COM 8D Los Glaciares National Park Statement of Outstanding Universal Value (Argentina). Saint Petersburg, Russian Federation. <http://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/4840&gt;; see also <http://whc.unesco.org/archive/2012/whc12-36com-8D-en.pdf&gt;. Accessed 15 May 2017.
18 World Heritage Committee. 2014. Decision 38 COM 8E Los Glaciares National Park, Statement of Outstanding Universal Value (Argentina). Doha, Qatar. http://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/6149&gt;. Accessed 15 May 2017.
19 World Heritage Committee. 2014. Decision 38COM 8E Los Glaciares National Park Statement of Outstanding Universal Value (Argentina). Qatar, Doha. <http://whc.unesco.org/en/decisions/6149&gt;. Accessed 8 May 2017.