Published by the International Institute for Sustainable Development
(IISD)
Vol. 18 No. 4
Monday, 8 November 1999
HIGHLIGHTS FROM AEWA MOP-1
SATURDAY AND SUNDAY,
6-7 NOVEMBER 1999
On Saturday afternoon, delegates attended a joint
opening ceremony for the first Meeting of the Parties (MOP-1) to the
African-Eurasian Waterbird Agreement (AEWA) and the sixth Conference of
the Parties (COP-6) to the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS). On
Sunday, delegates to the AEWA met throughout the day to address
organizational matters, amendments to the Action Plan, institutional and
financial arrangements and Conservation Guidelines. Working groups on
financial and technical matters met in the evening.
AEWA MOP-1 AND CMS COP-6 OPENING CEREMONY
Pieter Botha (South Africa) welcomed delegates and
recalled that 1999 marked the 20th anniversary of the CMS. He estimated
the AEWA MOP-1 would draw 150 delegates from 80 countries and COP-6
would bring together 250 delegates from over 100 countries. He noted
that the presence of many non-parties signaled growing interest in the
CMS.
Mohammed Valli Moosa, Minister of Environmental
Affairs and Tourism of South Africa, overviewed the South African State
of the Environment Report and highlighted agreements with neighboring
countries, including Mozambique and Zimbabwe, to create trans-frontier
wildlife protection parks.
Geke Faber, State Secretary for Agriculture, Nature
Management and Fisheries of the Netherlands, said AEWA implementation
should help achieve sustainable development and serve as an example for
species conservation. She called for close collaboration with UNEP,
training and information programmes, joint implementation with the CMS
and eventual expansion of the AEWA to include forestry and other fields.
Gila Altmann, Parliamentarian State Secretary,
German Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature Conservation and
Nuclear Safety, stressed the importance of sound research in formulating
effective conservation strategies. She welcomed the AEWA Secretariat’s
possible relocation in Bonn and extended an invitation to host COP-7.
She stressed that the CMS supplements, rather than duplicates, the
Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) and urged non-parties to join
the CMS. Kas Hamman, Director of Environment, West Cape Province of
South Africa, welcomed participants to the West Cape area and described
its unique ecological aspects.
Speaking on behalf of NGOs, David Pritchard (BirdLife
International) lauded the openness of the CMS process to NGO
participation and highlighted the NGO’s significant input to the CMS.
He called for increased coordination between global conventions and for
qualitative national reporting. He signaled NGOs’ intent to question
the lack of progress on some initiatives, and called for timely,
selective and appropriate resource allocation. The South African Post
Office presented a series of CMS species stamps in recognition of the
Convention.
Klaus Töpfer, UNEP Executive Director, identified
the CMS as an aspect of biodiversity conservation and underscored the
close linkages between cultural and biological diversity. He stressed
the need for cultural solidarity to address global challenges and
emphasized the need to link conservation of migratory species with
overcoming poverty. Describing migratory species as travelers without
passports, uninterested in ideological differences or borders, he
stressed the need for transboundary cooperation for their conservation.
AEWA OPENING PLENARY
Arnulf Müller-Helmbricht, CMS Executive Secretary,
opened AEWA MOP-1 and invited delegates to consider the provisional
agenda (AEWA/MOP 1.1). He asked that welcome addresses be submitted in
writing to the Secretariat. Gerard Boere, Secretary General of MOP-1,
noting a full agenda and limited time, encouraged delegates to begin
substantive work. Delegates adopted the agenda and the rules of
procedure (AEWA/MOP 1.4). Mbareck Diop (Senegal) was elected MOP-1 Chair
and F.H.J. von der Assen (the Netherlands) was elected Vice-Chair. Diop
thanked delegates for his election, the Netherlands for the Interim
Secretarial work, UNEP and the Bonn Convention.
The Plenary agreed to establish a Credentials
Committee comprised of delegates from Germany, the Gambia, the
Netherlands, Monaco and Tanzania. The Plenary adopted a resolution
granting the following countries, which have met the requirements to
become a Party but are awaiting finalization of the procedure, full
participating status with the right to vote: Benin, Denmark, Finland,
South Africa and the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia. FRANCE said
it had signed but not ratified the Agreement. The Plenary also took note
of ratifications of the Convention and the dates of entry into force for
various Parties (AEWA/MOP 1.6).
Bert Lenten (AEWA Interim Secretariat) highlighted
the work of the interim Secretariat, including promotion of the
Agreement, preparations for MOP-1, funding of participation and gaining
ratifications necessary to enable the Agreement to enter into force on 1
November 1999 (AEWA/MOP 1.5).
PLENARY
AMENDMENTS TO THE ACTION PLAN: Derek Scott
(Wetlands International) detailed proposed amendments to the Action Plan
(AEWA/MOP 1.7) which would expand it to include all 170 species under
the AEWA and update the status of those species already covered. He
noted amendments necessary to accommodate the proposed expansion,
including reference to: conflict between fish-eating birds and human
activities; and disturbances to colonial nesting birds from human
recreation. He explained the methodology for determining conservation
status within the Action Plan for the additional 111 species and noted
that the Report on the Conservation Status of Migratory Waterbirds (AEWA/Inf
.1.1) provides further details on the species’ status. Noting
increased knowledge on various populations, he said their conservation
status within the Action Plan would need to be amended and said improved
descriptions for some populations called for use of subdivisions.
FINLAND, on behalf of the EU, supported the
amendments, subject to the provision of more detail on certain species,
and noted the need to identify which species would be subject to
hunting. The UK opposed a proposal to list subdivisions of the
Red-breasted Merganser, noting a lack of sound supporting evidence. With
regard to colonial nesting waterbirds, SWITZERLAND added reference to
roosting. RWANDA asked how migratory birds in areas in conflict are
classified. In response, Boere noted difficulty of reflecting this
special circumstance in the Action Plan. The Federation of Fieldsports
Associations of the EU (FACE) noted the AEWA states the use of lead shot
for hunting should cease by the year 2000 and questioned the feasibility
of this goal for many Range States. Delegates agreed to further
discussion on the amendments to a working group.
INSTITUTIONAL ARRANGEMENTS: On the
establishment of a permanent AEWA Secretariat, GERMANY offered to
circulate a letter detailing their offer and conditions for hosting the
Secretariat. Müller-Helmbricht reviewed the revised Terms of Reference
for the Secretariat Arrangement (AEWA/MOP 1.10) and stressed the
importance of establishing administrative cohesion between CMS Agreement
Secretariats.
Regarding establishment of the Technical Committee,
Lenten outlined the proposed geographical division of the agreement area
and rules of procedure for the AWEA Technical Committee (AEWA/MOP 1.11).
He said five African and four European regions had been defined and
noted that the Committee would be comprised of one expert from each of
the nine regions as well as three independent and three NGOs experts.
GERMANY, supported by MONACO and SWITZERLAND, suggested that an observer
from each contracting Party receive a de facto invitation to all
Committee meetings. Chair Diop requested delegates consider details in a
working group.
FINANCIAL ARRANGEMENTS: Lenten introduced
the proposed 2000-2002 budget for the AEWA (AEWA/MOP 1.12) and drew
attention to the draft table of budget estimates. MONACO supported
including provision for voluntary contributions and for preparation of
the MOP. NIGER called for including assistance for project
implementation in the field and noted a potential need for more
Secretariat staff. GERMANY remarked that the budget estimates overlooked
the financial assistance offered by Germany, contingent on locating the
Secretariat in Bonn, which includes 50,000 DM per year and payments for
office equipment and interpretation. SWITZERLAND noted the draft budget
does not consider cost reduction arising from synergies with other
Conventions such as the Ramsar Convention. GUINEA said provision for ten
participants to attend the Technical Committee was insufficient and
further noted Spanish interpretation was not included. SENEGAL stressed
the inclusion of assistance for developing country experts. FINLAND
suggested including voluntary contributions and work in the field in the
small conservation grants fund. In response to delegates’
interventions, Lenten noted: the budget was prepared without knowledge
of the German offer; voluntary contributions are difficult to estimate;
projects in the field are not budgeted; and Spanish is not an official
AEWA language. Boere said the budget would be revised in the working
group to reflect the German proposal. He expressed his support for
channeling implementation assistance directly rather than through the
budget. ZIMBABWE called for provision for some secretarial
representation in Africa.
Boere introduced the guidelines on financial
contributions, including contributions in cash and in kind (AEWA/MOP
1.13). He proposed, and delegates agreed, that voluntary contributions
and contributions in kind should be administered according to CMS
financial guidelines. He feared that the acceptance of contributions in
kind, in lieu of cash payment of obligatory contributions, might set a
dangerous precedent as such payment would be difficult to implement. Müller-Helmbricht
remarked that only organizations, such as the IUCN, have made use of
such contributions and considered the AEWA to be an inappropriate fora
for such a funding modality. Noting some developing countries may need
an alternative mechanism to pay their contributions, he suggested the
issue be further considered in a working group. GERMANY requested that
the guidelines be clarified. Underscoring that contributions are a MOP
responsibility, he said the issue should not be delegated to the
Secretariat.
Boere introduced a project with regard to a small
grants fund. MONACO inquired about implementation of this project and
questioned its management by UNEP. GERMANY said the AEWA Secretariat was
too small to organize such a fund and supported administration by a
separate entity. Boere suggested management by an independent
international organization. NIGER and SENEGAL suggested the small
conservation grants fund imitate Ramsar’s integrated management
system. SWITZERLAND noted accessing funds through UNEP might be
cumbersome.
CONSERVATION GUIDELINES: Janine van Vessem
(Wetlands International) introduced draft Conservation Guidelines
developed by Wetlands International with support from the governments of
Switzerland and the Netherlands (AEWA/MOP 1.8). She overviewed
guidelines for: developing single-species action plans; identifying and
tackling emergency situations; preparing site inventories; sustainably
harvesting migratory species; regulating trade in migratory species;
developing ecotourism in wetlands; addressing conflicts between
waterbirds and human activities; and developing a waterbird monitoring
protocol. She described the proposed guidelines as general enough to be
applicable to all species and Range States and remarked that they should
be reviewed and updated on a regular basis by the Technical Committee.
The EU welcomed the guidelines but emphasized that Parties are not
obligated to strictly abide by them. With regard to the guidelines on
trade, he noted possible overlap and synergy with CITES. Noting that the
Ramsar agreement refers to �zones� and that the proposed guidelines
refer to �sites,� SWITZERLAND noted the need for compatibility with
Ramsar. He also pointed to possible synergies with Ramsar.
WORKING GROUPS
The Plenary established two working groups: one on
financial and administrative matters, chaired by F.H.J. von der Assen
(the Netherlands); and the other on technical and biological matters
chaired by David Stroud (United Kingdom). Both working groups convened
in an evening session. The group on financial and administrative issues
considered, inter alia, draft resolutions on establishment of the
permanent Secretariat, financial and administrative matters, guidelines
for contributions in cash and contributions in kind, establishment of a
small conservation grants fund and establishment of the Technical
Committee. It revised the proposed budget to accommodate the proposed
German contributions and other amendments. The group on technical and
biological matters addressed amendments to the Action Plan, including
the phase-out date for lead shot, and changes to the draft Conservation
Guidelines.
IN THE CORRIDORS
Despite some delegates intimating that relocating
the Secretariat in Bonn may not be optimal for scientific and technical
collaboration, many agreed that for practical reasons, such as
administrative efficiencies and financial benefits, it appeared Bonn
would �fly.�
THINGS TO LOOK FOR TODAY
AEWA PLENARY: Plenary will reconvene at 9:30
am in the Grand Ballroom to discuss international implementation
priorities, establishment of a registry of international AEWA projects
and a draft management plan for the Brent Goose.
WORKING GROUPS: The working groups on
financial and administrative and technical and biological matters will
convene in the evening.
|