|
Published
by the International
Institute for Sustainable Development (IISD)
Vol.
21 No. 11
Monday, 24 April 2000
SUMMARY OF THE ELEVENTH CONFERENCE OF THE
PARTIES TO THE CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN ENDANGERED
SPECIES OF WILD FAUNA AND FLORA:
10-20 APRIL 2000
The eleventh Conference of the Parties (COP-11) to the
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of
Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) convened from 10-20 April 2000,
at UNEP Headquarters in Nairobi, Kenya, drawing together
approximately 2100 participants representing governments,
NGOs, and IGOs. Delegates at COP-11 considered 62 proposals to
amend Appendices I and II as well as over 40 resolutions on a
wide range of topics, including: the evolution of the
Convention; financial matters; conservation of and trade in
tigers, elephants, rhinoceros, and Tibetan Antelopes; and
trade in bears, freshwater turtles and tortoises, seahorses,
and traditional medicines.
Most delegates were satisfied with the outcome of COP-11
and championed the compromise reached on African Elephants as
the triumph of COP-11. The rejection of proposals to downlist
populations of Gray and Minke Whale and the Hawksbill Turtle
was also characterized as a success by many, but this view was
not unanimous, reflecting the underlying conflicts within
CITES between issues related to conservation and trade.
A BRIEF HISTORY OF CITES
During the 1960s, countries became increasingly aware that
over-exploitation of wildlife through international trade was
contributing to the rapid decline of many plant and animal
species. In 1963, the World Conservation Union (IUCN) began
drafting an international convention to regulate the export,
transit and import of rare or threatened wildlife species. The
international commitment for a convention was established in
June 1972, at the UN Conference on the Human Environment in
Stockholm, Sweden, which recommended the immediate preparation
of an international convention to deal with these issues. The
same year, IUCN, the United States and Kenya produced a
unified working paper, which became the basis for convention
negotiations. The final negotiations were held from 12
February to 2 March 1973 in Washington, DC. CITES was adopted
2 March 1973 and entered into force on 1 July 1975. There are
151 Parties to the Convention.
CITES conservation goals are to: monitor and stop
commercial international trade in endangered species; maintain
those species under international commercial exploitation in
an ecological balance; and assist countries toward a
sustainable use of species through international trade. CITES
Parties regulate wildlife trade through controls and
regulations on species listed in three appendices. Appendix I
lists species endangered due to international trade. Their
exchange is permitted only in exceptional circumstances.
Appendix II species require strictly regulated trade based on
quotas and/or permits to prevent their unsustainable use; and
controls aimed at maintaining ecosystems and preventing
species from becoming eligible for Appendix I. Appendix III
species are subject to regulation by a Party who requires the
cooperation of other Parties to control their international
trade. To list a species, a Party provides a proposal for COP
approval containing scientific and biological data on
population and trade trends. The proposal must be supported by
a two-thirds majority of Parties present and voting at a COP.
CITES only lists species whose populations are obviously
impacted by international trade. At present, there are 890
species of flora and fauna species in Appendix I; 29,111 in
Appendix II, and 241 in Appendix III. Flora species outnumber
fauna by approximately seven to one. As the trade impact on a
species increases or decreases, the COP decides whether or not
the species should be shifted between or removed from
appendices.
CITES also regulates international trade through a system
of permits and certificates that are required before specimens
enter or leave a country. Each Party must adopt national
legislation to provide official designation of a Management
Authority responsible for issuing these permits and
certificates based on the advice of a designated Scientific
Authority. Parties maintain trade records that are forwarded
to the CITES Secretariat annually, the sum of which enable the
Secretariat to compile statistical information on the world
volume of trade in listed species. These two designated
national authorities also enhance CITES enforcement through
cooperation with customs, police, or appropriate agencies.
The operational bodies of CITES include the COP and its
Standing Committee, as well as several scientific advisory
committees, the Animals Committee, the Plants Committee, the
Nomenclature Committee and the Identification Manual
Committee. Located in Geneva, the CITES Secretariat interprets
Convention provisions, and services the CITES Parties and
Committees.
REPORT OF COP-11
On the eve of COP-11, Sunday, 9 April 2000, delegates met
in an official opening ceremony. CITES Secretary-General
Willem Wijnstekers opened the conference by noting that CITES
has been one of the international environmental conventions
with the most direct impact on species conservation. He added
that there is a need for applied synergy with other
multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs), particularly
biodiversity-related MEAs, in order to strengthen the
Convention’s capacity and success.
Robert Hepworth (United Kingdom), Chair of the CITES
Standing Committee, remarked that approximately six billion
humans are dependent on wildlife for food, fuel, medicine and
their livelihoods, but refuted the perceived conflict in
meeting both human and wildlife needs. He attributed CITES’
success to its practical concept of regulating or prohibiting
trade, its ability to evolve, and the hard work of governments
in implementing the agreement.
UNEP Executive Director Klaus Töpfer stressed that CITES
has evolved into the most significant wildlife conservation
tool. He recalled that causes of biodiversity loss, such as
poverty and debt, are common knowledge and suggested that a
new form of solidarity be created to protect the global
commons.
In the opening plenary session on Monday, 10 April, Kenyan
President Daniel arap Moi welcomed delegates to Nairobi and
identified the biggest challenge in the new millennium as
ensuring that CITES both adapts to new areas and emerging
issues, and creates synergies with other relevant treaties,
especially trade instruments.
Standing Committee Chair Hepworth introduced two amendments
to the Rules of Procedure (Doc. 11.1(Rev.2)), which were
adopted with minor amendments. He announced the Standing
Committee’s nominations for COP-11 officers: Chair, Bagher
Asadi (Iran); Vice-Chairs, Emmanuel Severre (Tanzania) and
Horace Walters (Saint Lucia); Committee I Chair, Margarita
Clemente (Spain); Committee II Chair, Veit Koester (Denmark);
Budget Committee Chair, Kenneth Stansell (US); and Credentials
Committee Chair, Janet Owen (New Zealand). China, Jordan,
Tunisia, the Russian Federation, the US, the Dominican
Republic and New Zealand were nominated to serve on the
Credentials Committee.
Chair Asadi introduced the list of observers, of 56
international and 129 national organizations. He said that the
success of the conference means achieving the best optimal
outcomes on issues and disputes. He then introduced, and
delegates adopted, the Agenda (Doc. 11.3 (Rev. 1)) and the
Programme of Work (Doc. 11.4 (Rev. 1)).
ORGANIZATIONAL MATTERS
Delegates met in four Plenary sessions on Monday, 10 April,
Tuesday, 11 April, and Thursday, 13 April, to discuss
strategic and administrative matters. Following Plenary on
Tuesday, 11 April, delegates divided into Committees I and II.
Committee I, chaired by Margarita Clemente, met in 14 sessions
and addressed, inter alia: the procedure for the review of
criteria for amendment of Appendices I and II; quotas for
species in Appendix I; conservation of and trade in
rhinoceroses and elephants; trade in freshwater turtles,
seahorses, Bigleaf Mahogany and hard coral; transport of live
animals; and proposals to amend Appendices I and II, including
whales, elephants, sharks and turtles. Committee II, chaired
by Veit Koester, met in 12 sessions to address, inter alia:
permanent committees Terms of Reference (TORs); the
relationship between CITES and the Food and Agriculture
Organization (FAO) and the International Whaling Commission (IWC);
introduction from the sea; national reports; enforcement;
national laws; trade in bear specimens; bushmeat; diagnostic
samples; a universal labeling system for the identification of
sturgeon specimens; and the information management strategy.
The Budget Committee, chaired by Kenneth Stansell, convened in
six sessions to consider: the financial report for 1997-1999;
external funding; expenditures for 2000; Secretariat staffing;
the budget for 2001-2002; and the medium-term plan 2001-2005.
Several working groups were convened over the course of COP-11
on tigers, freshwater turtles, hard coral, Bigleaf Mahogany,
seahorses, rhinoceros, bears, trade in elephant specimens,
introduction from the sea, diagnostic samples and export
permits for cosmetics containing caviar.
The following is a summary of proposals and resolutions
considered at COP-11 according to the meeting’s agenda.
STRATEGIC AND ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS
Delegates heard Committee and Secretariat reports and
considered the evolution of the Convention in Plenary.
Committee II examined issues relating to CITES relationship
with the IWC and FAO and the TORs for permanent committees.
MATTERS RELATED TO THE STANDING COMMITTEE: On Tuesday, 11
April, Standing Committee Chair Hepworth presented the Chair’s
Report (Doc. 11.8). He identified challenges, including:
reforming the Secretariat; implementing the 1997 "Harare
Compromise" on ivory trade; addressing escalating tiger
poaching and smuggling; developing the Strategic Plan; and
addressing non-compliance of seven Parties. On elephants, he
highlighted successes, including: cooperative work with IUCN
and TRAFFIC; creation of the Monitoring of Illegal Killing of
Elephants (MIKE), Elephant Trade Information System (ETIS) and
interim monitoring systems; consensus on conducting ivory
auctions; and smooth conduct of trade in Africa and Japan. He
said the Technical and High-level Tiger Missions had
pinpointed reasons for smuggling tigers. Several delegations
commented on the report, which was approved.
REPORTS OF THE SECRETARIAT: On Tuesday, 11 April, CITES
Deputy Secretary-General Jim Armstrong introduced, and
delegates approved, the Report of the Secretariat (Doc.
11.9.1). Secretary-General Wijnstekers presented the
Secretariat report on staffing (Doc. 11.9.2). The Plenary
agreed to a UK suggestion to endorse the report after
discussion in the Budget Committee.
COMMITTEE REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: On Tuesday, 11
April, Animals Committee Chair Robert Jenkins (Australia)
presented the Committee’s report (Doc. 11.11.1). He
underlined a recommendation repealing a resolution on
swiftlets, as the scientific research for its implementation
is complete, and a recommendation to repeal a resolution on
international trade in sharks. He also noted difficulties in
compiling a list of animals bred in captivity for commercial
purposes, and recommended listing species of critical
conservation concern. The report was adopted.
Plants Committee Chair Margarita Clemente (Spain) presented
the Committee’s report outlining activities since COP-10
(Doc. 11.11.2), noting that since many of the 25,000 Appendix
II species were listed in 1970s, the Committee introduced an
ongoing systematic review of the Appendix. She said an
identification manual and slides had been sent to Parties to
assist them in identifying CITES species. Regarding the work
programme through COP-12, she highlighted, inter alia, the
need to implement the action plan; continue the review of
Appendix II; and improve regional directories. The report was
adopted.
Identification Manual Committee Chair Ruth Landolt
(Switzerland) presented the Committee’s report (Doc.
11.11.13). She noted that since COP-10 only Switzerland had
expressed interest in, and appointed members to, the Committee
and that only six countries had submitted fauna data. The
report was adopted.
Nomenclature Committee Vice-Chair Marinus Hoogmoed
(Netherlands) identified the role of the Committee contained
in its report (Doc. 11.11.4.1), including: responding to
enquiries on taxa nomenclature, designating appropriate
taxonomic authorities; reviewing the nomenclature with the
Secretariat; and reviewing the nomenclature of species
proposed for listing. Delegates adopted the report.
TERMS OF REFERENCE OF PERMANENT COMMITTEES: The Secretariat
introduced several changes to TORs for CITES committees (Doc.
11.13). The proposal seeks to, inter alia, harmonize TOR
differences in the Plants and Animals Committees and to
translate the TOR into draft resolutions. The resolution,
adopted in Plenary (Com. 11.1), calls for increasing Standing
Committee membership to three representatives for regions with
31 to 45 Parties or four representatives for regions with more
than 45 Parties; undertaking a periodic review of animal or
plant species in CITES appendices by consulting Parties and
working directly with range States in the selection process;
and appointing a zoologist and botanist to the Nomenclature
Committee to coordinate and monitor input from specialists.
EVOLUTION OF THE CONVENTION: Strategic Plan: On Thursday,
13 April, the Secretariat introduced, and delegates adopted,
the action plan to improve the effectiveness of the Convention
(Doc. 11.12.1). Kenneth Stansell, in his capacity as Chair of
the Standing Committee working group on the CITES Strategic
Plan (Doc. 11.12.2), highlighted a number of priority
implementation goals and objectives. Switzerland and the World
Conservation Trust expressed concern over the increased
workload and its financial implications. Norway, along with
South Africa, underlined the importance of strengthening CITES’
scientific basis, and noted the need to cooperate with other
conventions. Mexico suggested giving more attention to plant
issues. Canada proposed the development of performance
measures. The Strategic Plan was adopted.
Cooperation with Other Biodiversity-Related Agreements:
Secretary-General Wijnstekers introduced the Standing
Committee-endorsed report on cooperation with other
biodiversity-related agreements (Doc. 11.12.3) and drew
attention to policy areas, including, inter alia, training,
capacity building, compliance control, and organizations with
which CITES could achieve synergy. Hamdallah Zedan, Executive
Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD),
highlighted two important areas for potential cooperation
between CITES and the CBD to be considered at CBD COP-5 to be
held 15–27 May 2000, in Nairobi. He said new national
reporting guidelines and the Strategic Plan, which includes
consideration of joint programming, would be important areas
of cooperation between the CBD and CITES. Arnulf
Müller-Helmbrecht, Secretary-General of the Convention on
Migratory Species (CMS), noted that the CMS provides the legal
and programmatic basis to conserve migratory species. He
suggested that joint programming should be explored and
implemented for species listed by both CITES and CMS, and
announced that the two conventions will enter into
consultation to establish a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU).
The US cautioned that any process for cooperation with other
conventions should not erode trade rules established by CITES.
The document was adopted.
Improving the Effectiveness of Financing CITES
Implementation: On Thursday, 13 April, France introduced a
proposal for improving the effectiveness of financing CITES
implementation (Doc. 11.12.4). She suggested creating a
Standing Committee working group on a funding mechanism for
specific fauna and flora conservation and added that the
Secretariat should cooperate with Global Environmental
Facility (GEF) when considering requests for financing.
Botswana, Cameroon and others supported the document. Japan
noted that this new financial mechanism should be voluntary.
Chair Asadi established an informal working group to further
discuss the issue. On Wednesday, 19 April, France introduced a
revised resolution on improving CITES’ effectiveness (Com.
11.33), and noted the Standing Committee will form a working
group to, inter alia, inventory existing funding mechanisms
for flora and fauna conservation. The resolution was adopted.
SYNERGY WITH THE FAO: The US presented its proposal on
synergy with the FAO in developing TORs to review CITES
listing criteria for consideration at COP-12 (Doc. 11.14).
Some delegates supported the proposal, while others, including
Japan, Argentina and Oldepesca opposed, citing duplication
with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and
limited expertise in FAO on some aspects. The US withdrew the
proposal.
INTERNATIONAL WHALING COMMISSION: On Tuesday, 11 April,
Norway and Japan introduced a proposal urging CITES to use its
criteria to list cetaceans in Appendices I and II, taking into
account the IWC’s scientific information (Doc. 11.15.1
(Rev.1)), but also noted the IWC currently violates its
original legal framework. The US then presented a proposal
endorsing cooperation with the IWC on the management of and
international trade in whales (Doc. 11.15.2), which several
delegations supported, noting the IWC's primacy and CITES’
obligation to cooperate with other international bodies.
Iceland opposed giving authority to the IWC. Antigua and
Barbuda urged CITES to divorce itself from the IWC. Saint
Lucia requested the IWC to lower membership fees. The IWC said
a management scheme for sustainable commercial whaling is
under way and that proposals to downlist Gray and Minke Whales
could negatively impact whale conservation. The US offered to
withdraw its proposal providing Norway and Japan withdrew
theirs. Norway and Japan’s proposal was rejected on Monday,
17 April, by a secret vote called for by Norway. The US
subsequently withdrew its proposal. (For further discussion on
whales please refer to the section on consideration of
proposals to amend Appendices I and II, page 9.)
CONTRIBUTION OF OBSERVERS: The US introduced, and the
Plenary adopted, a resolution recognizing the important
contribution made by observers to the CITES process (Doc.
11.16). The resolution recommends the Secretariat make efforts
ensuring that each observer is represented in Plenary and
Committee sessions and to invite qualified observers to
participate in working group meetings
FINANCING AND BUDGETING
The Budget Committee discussed the financial report for
1997, 1998 and 1999, estimated expenditures for 2000, budget
for 2001-2002 and medium-term, and external funding.
FINANCIAL REPORTS: On Friday, 14 April, the Committee
approved the financial reports for 1997, 1998 and 1999 and
attached annexes detailing each year’s total expenditures
(Doc. 11.10.1 (Rev.1)). The US and others asked for
clarification on expected over- and under-expenditures of
several budget items. Germany and the UK requested better
methods to refine future projections. The Secretariat agreed
to provide explanations in cases where expenditures exceeded
20% of projected costs.
ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES: On Friday, 14 April, the Committee
approved the budget’s estimated expenditures for 2000 (Doc.
11.10.2). The Secretariat suggested external donors provide
additional funds for developing capacity-building programmes
and training courses.
2001-2002 BUDGET AND MEDIUM-TERM PLAN: On Tuesday, 11
April, Friday, 14 April, and Saturday, 15 April, the Committee
discussed the 2001-2002 budget and medium-term plan (Doc.
11.10.3 (Rev.1)). Chair Stansell noted the budget was 13%
higher than estimates agreed upon at COP-10 due to increased
Secretariat activities and newly approved staff positions. He
added that a deficit for 2003 was possible if Parties do not
increase their annual contributions. Switzerland, the US and
the UK suggested a gradual approach to financing posts and
activities. There were also calls for a proposed overall 20%
budget reduction. After several revised budget scenarios, the
Committee agreed to a budget that approves: four new posts,
two funded through the Trust Fund and two through the balance
reserve; focusing on programme activity items; and using the
balance reserve to offset increased membership contributions.
EXTERNAL FUNDING: On Friday, 15 April, the Committee
approved a document on external funding (Doc. 11.10.4) that
notes contributions received in addition to regular CITES
Trust Fund contributions and special projects initiated with
external funding between January 1997 to December 1999. Chair
Stansell underlined the importance of external funding,
particularly in implementing the recently adopted Strategic
Plan. Japan, the largest external funding contributor,
emphasized that it could not commit to increased
contributions.
FINAL DECISIONS: On Wednesday, April 19, the Plenary
adopted the Budget Committee’s draft resolution on
Secretariat financing and budgeting (Com. 11.21). The
resolution noted that the 2001-2002 biennium budget represents
a 26.53% increase from the previous triennium. The increase
shall be covered by adjusting Party contributions by 6.1% and
the remaining deficit is drawn from the Trust Fund balance.
The COP agreed, inter alia, to:
accept expenditures for 1997-1999;
approve five new posts, two to be funded through the
Trust Fund, two through the reserve balance, and one from
additional savings, if available;
authorize the Secretariat to draw additional funds from
the CITES Trust Fund balance, provided that it is not
reduced below 1 million Swiss francs;
allocate available savings from the biennium budget to
implement capacity building, enforcement and regional
coordination activities; and
establish priorities for insufficiently funded budget
items.
INTERPRETATION AND IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONVENTION
Forty agenda items were considered under interpretation and
implementation of the Convention. Committee I primarily dealt
with items related to specific species, while Committee II
considered implementation items and resolutions to amend
decisions. For a detailed breakdown, please refer to the
COP-11 work programme (Doc. 11.4).
SPECIES INTRODUCED FROM THE SEA: On Thursday, 13 April,
AUSTRALIA introduced its resolution (Doc. 11.18) aiming to:
interpret and implement aspects of CITES Articles III, IV and
XIV; reach agreement on the meaning of "introduction from
the sea" and "not under the jurisdiction of any
state;" achieve synergy with other intergovernmental
bodies regulating marine stocks; and facilitate commerce of
marine species under threat by unregulated and illegal
fishing. A working group produced draft resolutions (Conf.
11.17 and Conf. 11.18) providing, inter alia, clearer
definition of marine environment not under a State’s
jurisdiction, clarification on information requirements, and
mechanism refinements for non-detriment findings. The EU,
Brazil, Vanuatu, Fiji, Canada and the US supported the
proposed draft resolution. Japan, Iceland, Belize, Uruguay,
Venezuela, Saint Lucia, China, Mexico, Tunisia, and Norway
opposed it. The proposals were rejected by a secret ballot
vote on Wednesday, 19 April.
CONSOLIDATION OF VALID RESOLUTIONS: The Plenary adopted a
resolution (Doc. 11.17), responding to decision 10.60 calling
for the Secretariat to continue consolidating existing COP
resolutions and decisions when appropriate. The resolution
contains three annexes of draft consolidated resolutions, on:
conservation of cetaceans, trade in cetacean specimens and the
relationship with the IWC; enforcement and compliance; and
resolutions relating to non-commercial loan, donation or
exchange of museum and herbarium specimens.
NATIONAL REPORTS REQUIRED UNDER ARTICLE VIII, PARAGRAPH
7(A) OF THE CONVENTION: The Secretariat presented its
recommendation to suspend trade in specimens of CITES-listed
species for Parties failing to submit annual reports in three
consecutive years (Doc. 11.19). Delegates urged the
Secretariat to assist member countries to develop national
legislation and prepare their reports. Belgium, supported by
TRAFFIC, stated the need to distinguish between countries not
submitting annual reports in the last three years and late
submissions. The proposal was adopted.
ENFORCEMENT: Review of Alleged Infractions: The Secretariat
presented the review covering, inter alia, the incidences,
enforcement action and analysis of illicit trade, the Global
Enforcement Recording System and permit confirmation (Doc.
11.20.1). Delegates noted its utility. The Secretariat
elaborated on the work on guidelines for permits and
certificates and collaboration with ICPO-Interpol and the
World Customs Organization (WCO) on a new computerized data
system to curb illicit trade. TRAFFIC suggested compiling
information on infraction trends. Spain requested guidelines
for identifying false certificates. Belgium noted not all
countries have capacity for DNA analysis.
Implementation of Resolutions: The Secretariat introduced,
and delegates adopted, a draft decision postponing to the next
Standing Committee meeting a discussion of problems Parties
have faced implementing existing resolutions (Doc. 11.20.2).
NATIONAL LAWS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONVENTION:
National Legislation Project: The Secretariat presented its
overview on measures taken to implement Decisions 10.19, 10.21
and 10.23 and the proposed legal capacity-building strategy
(Doc. 11.21.1). Delegates highlighted their needs: Zambia,
Liberia and Turkey on capacity building and Iceland on
developing national legislation. Cuba requested assistance for
small island States, while Argentina proposed provision of
technical resources for implementation. Zimbabwe inquired when
a sub-regional workshop to harmonize national legislation
would take place. The Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF) called
for funding for regional workshops. With these amendments, the
strategy was adopted.
National Laws for Implementation of CITES: On Wednesday, 12
April, the Secretariat presented a report on measures taken
with regard to Parties without adequate legislation (Doc.
11.21.2). Delegates noted the effectiveness of limited trade
sanctions in stimulating national legislation development. An
informal group comprising Australia, Germany, the David
Shepherd Conservation Foundation and the Secretariat was
requested to revise a draft decision to ensure its consistency
with decisions 10.19 to 10.23 to address concerns raised by
Australia regarding fairness of the draft decision. Delegates
adopted the draft decision.
REPORTING SEIZURES: On Thursday, 13 April, Israel withdrew
its proposal on reporting seizures (Doc. 11.22) in response to
delegates’ concern that it would be redundant with
resolution 9.9, duplicate efforts and possibly create
information leakage.
PERSISTENT OFFENDERS: Israel introduced a draft resolution
on persistent CITES offenders (Doc. 11.23) that recommended
the Secretariat circulate a list of such offenders and
Management Authorities reject CITES permits to persistent
offenders. Several delegations opposed the resolution, noting
it would infringe on sovereignty and individual rights. Israel
withdrew the proposal, but invited interested Parties to
cooperate on a revised draft for future consideration.
ANNOTATIONS IN THE APPENDICES: Switzerland outlined its
draft resolution (Doc. 11.24) that resulted from decision
10.70, requesting clarification of legal implementation issues
related to appendix annotations. Cameroon and Pakistan
expressed concern that a provision recommending Parties avoid
making annotations, including wild animals and trophies, could
negatively impact their sporting or local community interests.
The draft resolution was adopted. The resolution directs the
Secretariat to inform the Standing Committee, subsequent to
adopting a downlisting proposal subject to an annotation, of
increases in illegal trade or poaching and for the Standing
Committee to investigate.
PROCEDURE FOR THE REVIEW OF CRITERIA FOR AMENDMENT OF
APPENDICES I AND II: Delegates adopted the TORs for the review
of the criteria for amendment of Appendices I and II (Doc.
11.25). The TORs include data selection and the establishment
of a criteria working group of 12 experts. FAO noted its
Fisheries Department is currently reviewing CITES criteria for
aquatic populations, especially marine populations undergoing
commercial exploitation.
DEFINITION OF THE TERM "APPROPRIATE AND ACCEPTABLE
DESTINATIONS": On Thursday, 13 April, KENYA introduced a
proposal to define "appropriate and acceptable"
destinations to the body responsible, in order to eliminate
ambiguities that give rise to mistreatment and inappropriate
habitats for exported animals. The Fund for Animals
Incorporated said this lacuna enhances mistreatment of
animals. Some delegates preferred regulation through a binding
amendment of relevant annotations in the appendices. The Born
Free Foundation, the International Wildlife Coalition and the
Animal Welfare Institute supported the resolution. On Tuesday,
18 April, following extensive informal consultations,
delegates adopted the revised definition as being where a
State’s Scientific Authority is satisfied that a species’
recipient is suitably equipped to house and care for it (Doc.
11.26 (Rev. 1)).
RECOGNITION OF RISKS AND BENEFITS OF TRADE IN WILDLIFE:
Kenya introduced the resolution on the impact of unsustainable
trade in wildlife conservation (Doc. 11.27). Brazil and
Liberia supported the resolution but the EU, Japan, Canada,
Cuba, Colombia and Madagascar rejected it, with South Africa
evoking national sovereignty over resources. Kenya later
withdrew it.
QUOTAS FOR SPECIES IN APPENDIX I: The Secretariat
introduced, and delegates took note of, the recommendations
for quotas of the Appendix I-listed Leopard (Doc.
11.28.1.rev.1)) and Parties were invited to forward
recommendations on the current reporting system, as the
reports submitted do not adequately reflect the level of quota
management in some exporting countries. Delegates adopted
recommendations relating to export quotas granted to Pakistan
for the Appendix I-listed Markhor (Doc. 11.28.2). The
document: accepts the postponement of Pakistan’s survey
report due to climatic conditions; notes the absence of
reference to national revenue management; commends Pakistan
for its 1998 report; and suggests Pakistan provide information
on a sustainable monitoring programme to cover all important
Markhor subpopulations.
TRADE IN BEAR SPECIMENS: On Saturday, 15 April, the
Secretariat introduced recommendations on bears (Doc. 11.29)
requesting Parties to, inter alia, report on action taken to
implement resolution 10.8 and to confirm, adopt or improve
national legislation to reduce illegal trade in bear parts and
derivatives. A working group was established and drafted a
resolution, which was adopted on Monday, 17 April.
The resolution (Com. 11.22) directs Parties to, inter alia:
report on national legislation to control trade in bear parts;
share forensic technology; and evaluate the CITES Tiger
Missions for applicability to bears. The Standing Committee is
directed to consider illegal trade in bear parts at its 45th
and 46th meetings and to report to COP-12 on implementation of
resolution 10.8.
CONSERVATION OF AND TRADE IN TIGERS: On Tuesday, 11 April,
delegates overviewed the report of the CITES Tiger Mission
Technical Team and Political Mission to India, Japan and China
(Doc. 11.30). India called for a working group to re-examine
recommendations of trade sanctions issued against India. On
Thursday, 13 April, in the working group chaired by the US,
some delegates agreed that although sanctions might be
inappropriate, some form of pressure should be exercised to
compel India to improve its tiger conservation. Most delegates
agreed to reinstate financial incentives, but agreed that
spending should be monitored. On Tuesday, 18 April, delegates
adopted a compromise redraft proposal (Com. 11.32). The
proposal urges all Parties and non-Parties, especially tiger
range and consumer States to adopt comprehensive legislation
and enforcement controls, with the aim of eliminating trade in
tiger parts, and asks India to establish a specialized unit to
combat wildlife crime. It requires the Standing Committee to
review, via a targeted programme, the progress of tiger range
and consumer States, particularly those reviewed under the
Technical and Political Missions. It further replaces the
CITES Enforcement Task Force with a Tiger Enforcement Task
Force (TETF), whose tasks largely remain the same and, in
addition, has a provision for a 90-day withdrawal notice for
Parties.
CONSERVATION OF AND TRADE IN ELEPHANTS:
Experimental Trade in Raw Ivory: The Secretariat reported
on the results of decision 10.1 on experimental trade in raw
ivory (Doc. 11.31.1). He stated that on the basis of eight
national reports on illegal killings, the Secretariat had
concluded that illegal poaching had not increased in the three
range States allowed to trade. He said that in cases where it
had, the relationship with authorized trade had not been
established. Japan highlighted national efforts to prevent
illegal trade. India remarked that national figures indicating
increased elephant poaching since 1997 were not reported to
the Secretariat. Kenya said the Secretariat had defied the
Precautionary Principle in interpreting figures and based its
conclusions on erroneous information. The David Shepherd
Conservation Foundation said the experimental trade was
invalid because, inter alia, decision 10.1 was not discussed
before the COP-10 vote and the three trading range States had
participated in the Standing Committee’s evaluation,
resulting in a conflict of interest. The International
Wildlife Coalition questioned the scientific validity of the
Secretariat’s conclusions. TRAFFIC contested NGO figures on
poaching, suggesting double counting.
Monitoring the Illegal Killing of Elephants: MIKE reported
on its work and on the work of the ETIS in monitoring illegal
trade and killing of elephants (Doc. 11.31.2). Delegates took
note of the document.
Trade in Elephant Specimens: On Monday, 17 April, Kenya
introduced a resolution to revise resolution 10.10 on trade in
elephant specimens (Doc. 11.31.3 (Rev.1)). A technical working
group, chaired by Cameroon, was established to further address
the issue. On Wednesday, 19 April, Switzerland introduced the
group’s revision of resolution 10.10, noting that the role
of range States and capacity building were strengthened.
Delegates adopted the revisions that, inter alia, request MIKE
and ETIS to build capacity in range States, and provide for
COP consideration of information on illegal elephant killing
from credible law enforcement and professional resource
management sources.
Non-Commercial Disposal of Ivory: Kenya introduced a
resolution to modify the terms of non-commercial disposal of
ivory stockpiles, established by decision 10.2 (Doc. 11.31.4).
She suggested the obligation to establish a trust fund
discouraged donors from participating in such disposal and
proposed that funds go directly into capacity building
instead. Some delegations, including Sudan and India supported
the resolution, but others, including the UK and the EU,
opposed and Kenya withdrew the proposal. (For further
discussion on elephants, please refer to section on
consideration of proposals to amend Appendices I and II, page
10.)
CONSERVATION OF AND TRADE IN RHINOCEROSES: On Wednesday, 12
April, the Secretariat introduced a recommendation repealing a
rhinoceros resolution adopted at COP-9 (Doc. 11.32). The EU
and the US supported amending the resolution and suggested
setting up a working group. On Thursday, 13 April, the US
highlighted substantial changes in the draft document,
including inserting a requirement for Parties to report on
rhinoceros conservation efforts and to implement national
legislation, and requesting the Secretariat to compile and
evaluate the reports. On Wednesday, 19 April, delegates
adopted an amended resolution for the conservation of and
trade in rhinoceroses (Com. 11.19), which urges Parties to,
inter alia: identify, mark and register rhinoceros stocks;
implement comprehensive legislation and enforcement controls;
increase cooperation among States to curtail illegal trade;
and develop strategies for reducing the use and consumption of
rhinoceros parts. It further requests Parties to submit a
report to the Secretariat six months prior to each COP,
detailing, inter alia, the status of captive and wild
rhinoceros populations, incidents of illegal hunting, and
illegal trade.
VICUÑA WOOL AND CLOTH: Delegates adopted a draft
resolution allowing for import of vicuña cloth bearing a
trademark stating the country of origin and requesting
exporters to provide the Secretariat details of exports (Doc.
11.33).
CONSERVATION AND CONTROL OF TRADE IN THE TIBETAN ANTELOPE:
China introduced its proposal calling for stronger measures to
curb poaching of the Tibetan Antelope for shahtoosh-processing
(Doc. 11.34). India reported a governance arrangement
constraining regulation of shahtoosh processing in one State.
The EU’s request to exclude privately owned Tibetan
Antelopes was accepted. The amended and adopted proposal (Com.
11.5 Rev) covers: external and internal trade; other raw
materials besides wool; a ban in producer and consumer
countries; government responsibility in fundraising; and
registration of legal stocks only. Suriname, Indonesia and
South Africa expressed reservations due to references to
internal trade.
TRADE IN FRESHWATER TURTLES AND TORTOISES: On Wednesday, 12
April, Germany introduced a discussion paper addressing
conservation impacts of the increasing turtle trade (Doc.
11.35). A working group met throughout the week to finalize a
draft resolution. The Plenary adopted a resolution on the
conservation of and trade in freshwater turtles and tortoises
in Asia and other regions (Com. 11.7), urging Parties to,
inter alia: increase enforcement efforts with regard to
existing legislation; assess current efforts to manage native
freshwater populations by establishing quotas; implement
research programmes to monitor the impact of trade; and
increase public awareness of threats to the species. The
resolution also directs the Secretariat to convene a technical
workshop to establish conservation priorities for sustainable
trade in freshwater turtles and tortoises.
TRADE IN SEAHORSES: On Wednesday, 12 April, the US
introduced a document on seahorse trade (Doc. 11.36). A
working group was established to discuss the issue and the
Animals Committee met on Thursday, 13 April, to present a
draft resolution directing the Secretariat to assist in
obtaining funds to support a technical workshop on seahorse
conservation. On Wednesday, 19 April, the Plenary adopted a
resolution on the conservation of seahorses (Com. 11.8),
requiring Parties to provide all relevant information
concerning the status of the species; encouraging scientific
research to promote long-term conservation and sustainable
use; and convening a technical workshop. It also directs the
Animals Committee to prepare a discussion paper on the
biological and trade status of seahorses and other members of
the Syngnathidae family for COP-12.
TRADE IN HARD CORAL: On Wednesday, 12 April, the UK
presented a previous working group’s results on
identification and reporting requirements for trade in hard
coral (Doc. 11.37). He noted consensus on: ways to report
trade in specimens of hard coral; the importance of defining
and recognizing coral; and reporting to generic versus species
level. The Secretariat proposed the creation of a working
group chaired by the UK and said it was premature to wave
reporting requirements. On Thursday, 13 April, the UK
introduced a draft resolution allowing a lower threshold for
including gravel, which excludes sand. The resolution
establishes ecosystem impact criteria for import and export of
rocks and identifies coral at species level for trade purposes
and at genus level for taxonomy purposes. On Wednesday, 19
April, delegates adopted a final draft resolution adding coral
definitions (Com. 11.9). The resolution also calls for
improving guidelines for coral species recognition in trade
and highlights collaboration with exporting countries.
TIMBER SPECIES: Delegates considered Secretariat
recommendations on whether to repeal or maintain 14 COP-10
decisions on timber species (Doc 11.38.1). The decisions state
that, inter alia, Parties should determine whether national
standards organizations have already developed vernacular
nomenclatures for timber species, and the potential for
silvicultural techniques will be investigated to determine
whether they provide bases for trade regimes. Delegates
accepted all proposals except for the recommendation to repeal
decision 10.52 requiring submission of species’ names to
importers and CITES’ enforcement agencies.
BIGLEAF MAHOGANY: On Wednesday, 12 April, BRAZIL introduced
a proposal on Bigleaf Mahogany (Doc. 11.38.2) and NICARAGUA
suggested creating a working group associated with the Plants
Committee, for which the US offered funding. On Thursday, 13
April, the US introduced TORs for a Mahogany working group,
providing for, inter alia: reviewing of Appendix III species
listing effectiveness; assessing information management; and
studying measures to widen the scope of Appendix III listings.
COLOMBIA and ECUADOR called for Research & Development on
forest resources. The NETHERLANDS suggested the working group
consider Appendix II. On Wednesday, 19 April, the US
introduced revised TORs (Com. 11.8), providing additionally
for an analysis of legal and illegal trade issues. The working
group will report its findings at COP-12. The resolution was
adopted.
STANDARD NOMENCLATURE: Nomenclature Committee Chair
Hoogmoed suggested nomenclature changes in Doc. 11.4.2 and
Doc. 11.39 (Com. 11.30). The document was adopted.
ASSISTANCE TO SCIENTIFIC AUTHORITIES: A document on
assistance to Scientific Authorities for making non-detriment
findings was introduced (Doc. 11.40), encouraging the
Secretariat and Parties to develop and support workshops
designed to improve CITES implementation by Scientific
Authorities and to develop a manual for making non-detriment
findings. El Salvador noted the importance of convening
Scientific Authority regional meetings. Vanuatu highlighted
the need to include Pacific Island countries in the workshops.
Delegates supported the initiative and it was adopted in
Plenary.
SIGNIFICANT TRADE IN APPENDIX II SPECIES: Implementation of
Resolution 8.9: On Wednesday, 12 April, the Secretariat
introduced in Committee I the information document on
implementation of resolution 8.9 on trade in wild-caught
animal species (Doc. 11.41.1). The Russian Federation
submitted a draft resolution on Thursday, 13 April, stating
that starting 1 January 2001, States should keep and submit
records of trade of sturgeon. On Wednesday, 19 April, a
revised resolution (Com. 11.4), resulting from an informal
working group, was presented. The US suggested specifying
Eurasian Sea basins. The Russian Federation stressed that
decisions should apply to all sturgeon populations. The
Secretariat noted disagreement and a vote was held on the US
amendment. Delegates rejected the amendment and the US and
Canada registered their objection to the entire document.
During Plenary, the US re-opened the debate, requesting the
resolution reflect that Parties failing to report will be
issued a zero quota. With this and other amendments, the
resolution was adopted. The resolution directs range States to
establish annual export quotas of sturgeon and report on
progress implementing resolution 10.12.
Revision of Resolution 8.9: The Secretariat introduced a
draft resolution in Committee II amending resolution 8.9 on
trade in wild-caught animal species and establishing a process
for the Animals Committee to review biological and trade
information on Appendix II species to identify problems in
trade regulation (Doc. 11.41.2) and extending the process to
the Plants Committee. Delegates adopted the resolution, which
directs the Plants and Animals Committees to review
biological, trade and other relevant information to identify
problems impeding implementation of Article IV.
APPENDIX II SUBJECT TO ANNUAL EXPORT QUOTAS: Delegates
reviewed the use of export quotas granted to Ecuador and
Tanzania for certain Appendix II species and recorded in the
annual reports submitted by the Management Authorities (Doc.
11.42). The Secretariat said the source and type of exports
were not adequately reflected. Delegates noted the document.
AMENDMENT OF RESOLUTION 5.10: South Africa introduced its
draft resolution amending resolution 5.10 on the definition of
"primarily commercial purposes" (Doc. 11.43), noting
it wished to withdraw the resolution’s operative sections,
but retain preambular language referring to commercial
purposes of imports. Canada, supported by the EU and the US,
opposed the preambular language, saying it made the term
"commercial purposes" more imprecise. The resolution
was withdrawn.
BUSHMEAT: The UK introduced a discussion paper and draft
decision (Doc. 11.44) to establish an on-going working group
to explore the trade and wildlife management issues associated
with bushmeat. In support, the Congo said bushmeat consumption
has moved from traditional subsistence to commercial trade,
causing population decline. The decision, which directs the
Secretariat to convene a working group to consider issues
related to the bushmeat trade, was adopted.
AMENDMENT OF RESOLUTION 9.6: Concerning Diagnostic Samples:
Switzerland presented a proposal jointly submitted with
Germany and the UK to amend resolution 9.6 concerning samples
for research, taxonomic and biomedical research, in order to
conform to domestic or international law requirements for the
transboundary shipment of diagnostic samples for conservation
(Doc. 11.45.1). The EU and others emphasized the need to
eliminate bureaucracies impeding expeditious transfers of
diagnostic specimens, particularly in emergencies. The
Secretariat said its inability to facilitate such requests
expeditiously is putting CITES into disrepute. Several
delegations and observers objected, citing, inter alia,
contravention of CITES and CBD provisions on access to genetic
resources, and the difficulty to regulate use. Delegates
adopted an informally negotiated proposal deferring the work
to the Animals Committee during the intersessional period, and
providing a TOR for the Committee (Com. 11.31 (Rev. 1)).
Cosmetic Products Containing Caviar: Germany introduced a
joint proposal with Switzerland, and supported by the EU, to
amend resolution 9.6 in order to eliminate re-exportation
permits for final cosmetic products that contain "less
than 0.05 gm of caviar of sturgeon species included in
Appendix II per kg of cosmetic product" (Doc. 11.45.2).
The proposal was rejected by a roll-call vote.
MOVEMENT OF LIVE ANIMALS: The Secretariat reported a lack
of consensus in the Standing Committee on COP-10 instructions
to establish a simplified procedure for cross-border movement
of live animals (Doc. 11.46). He drew attention to Annex I
containing a US draft of a certificate continuation sheet that
could prove useful to Parties. The Committee noted the
document.
REVISION OF RESOLUTIONS ON RANCHING: Delegates discussed
the revision of COP-10 resolutions on ranching and trade in
ranched specimens (Doc. 11.47 (Rev.1)). The document defines
the term "ranching" as rearing in a controlled
environment of specimens taken from the wild. The resolution
recommends, inter alia, that populations of species included
in Appendix I that occur within a Party’s jurisdiction, and
are deemed no longer endangered by the COP, to be included in
Appendix II; and that any proposal transferring a population
to Appendix II in order to conduct a ranching programme must
satisfy certain criteria. It also recommends that annual
reports on all relevant aspects of each approved ranching
operation be submitted to the Secretariat. Following several
minor amendments, the resolution was adopted.
REGISTRATION OF OPERATIONS IN BREEDING SPECIMENS ON
APPENDIX I: In presenting the proposed guidelines for
procedures to register and monitor breeding operations of
Appendix-I listed animal species for commercial purposes (Doc.
11.48), Animals Committee Chair Jenkins reported polarized
views in the Committee on resolution 8.15. Delegates adopted
the proposal amended by a drafting committee, after
incorporating: provisions for breeders to assure the exercise
is carried out in a "humane (non-cruel) manner" and
to describe the facilities housing current and expected
captive stock; new instructions to the Secretariat dealing
with species in Appendix I; and additional guidelines for
registering and monitoring breeding operations (Com. 11.27).
ANIMAL HYBRIDS: Animals Committee Chair Jenkins introduced,
and delegates adopted, an amendment clarifying the terms
"recent lineage" contained in resolution 10.17 on
animal hybrids (Doc. 11.49). The term is to be understood to
mean the previous four generations of a hybrid animal’s
lineage.
USE OF MICROCHIPS: On Saturday, 15 April, the Secretariat
introduced a draft resolution, incorporating proposals made by
the Czech Republic, on the use of coded-microchip implants for
marking live animals in trade (Doc. 11.50). On Tuesday, 18
April, the Secretariat presented a revised draft resolution
from the informal working group. The EU proposed substantive
revisions and the Czech Republic withdrew its counter
proposal. The adopted resolution recommends, inter alia, that
Parties: use implantable transponders with permanently unique
codes for live animal identification; implant microchip
transponders if consistent with the well-being of the
specimens; direct the Animals Committee to monitor
developments in microchip-implant technology; and consult
regularly with the International Standards Organization (ISO)
Central Secretariat.
TAGGING SYSTEM FOR CROCODILE SKINS: The Secretariat
described broad consultations conducted to clarify and
consolidate resolutions 9.22 and 6.17 on tagging systems for
crocodile skin identification that resulted in a revised
resolution (Doc. 11.51). The resolution recommending Parties
to maintain a universal tagging system using ISO country
coding was adopted.
MOVEMENT OF SAMPLE CROCODILIAN SKINS: The US presented its
draft decision (Doc. 11.52) streamlining the export or
re-export permits issuance procedure and stressed that
exemptions were not being sought. She said a draft resolution
would be prepared for COP-12. The EU suggested broadening the
decision’s scope. IUCN noted the purpose was to ease the
regulatory system. The Secretariat noted that budgetary
implications were not included. Committee II Chair Koester
requested that interested participants work on language for a
final decision, which was adopted at a subsequent session. The
decision directs the Secretariat to review methods to
streamline administrative procedures and to prepare a COP-12
proposal on relevant resolution amendment.
LABELING SYSTEM FOR STURGEON SPECIMENS (CAVIAR): On Monday,
17 April, delegates discussed a draft resolution on a
universal labeling system for sturgeon specimens
identification (Doc. 11.53). The EU, supported by the US and
Germany, suggested forming a working group to amend the
document. Switzerland supported a marking system for exported
caviar, whereas the Russian Federation and Iran preferred a
uniform labeling system for both exporting and re-exporting
countries. On Tuesday, 18 April, delegates adopted a consensus
document (Com. 11.29), outlining that, inter alia: any amount
of exported or re-exported caviar in excess of 250g should be
marked; a non-reusable packaging label should include the
grade of the caviar and a unique serial number for the
shipment; and Parties should establish a system of
registration or licensing for importers and exporters. Due to
the Secretariat’s lack of expertise and resources, a
directive to develop molecular markers was deferred to the
Animals Committee.
TRANSPORT OF LIVE ANIMALS: The Secretariat noted a lack of
feedback from Parties on the implementation of resolution
10.21 and its incorporation in national legislation, and
requiring Parties importing live animals to maintain records
of live specimen casualties per shipment (Doc. 11.54). He
suggested the lack of information would compel COP-12 to amend
or repeal the resolution. The EU, the US and Costa Rica
supported upholding and enforcing the resolution. Germany
suggested the export country attach the questionnaire to the
export document and provide data on casualties of illegal
shipments. Australia suggested the absence of records might
signify an absence of mortality. Delegates agreed to maintain
the resolution pending re-assessment at COP-12.
DEFINITION OF THE TERM "PREPARED": Kenya
introduced a draft resolution (Doc. 11.55) defining
"prepared" to apply from capture to shipment of a
species and recommends that Parties ensure the adequate
treatment of animals during the entire preparation process in
order to minimize the risk of injury, damage to health or
cruel treatment. Israel and Zimbabwe supported the proposal,
but requested further clarification of "prepared."
Switzerland, South Africa, Japan and Canada opposed. The US
opposed and suggested the Animals Committee’s transport
working group prepare guidelines taking into account Kenya’s
resolution for consideration at COP-12. KENYA withdrew its
resolution in favor of the US proposal. The issue will be
re-visited at COP-12.
TRADE IN TRADITIONAL MEDICINES: The Secretariat introduced
its draft decision (Doc. 11.56) aiming to simplify the
implementation of resolution 10.19. In support, Canada
suggested that a list of species traded for medicinal
properties should include "their parts." With this
and other minor amendments, the decision was adopted. The
decision directs the Secretariat
to, inter alia, evaluate Appendix II artificial propagation
levels for medicinal purposes; continue to develop lists of
plants and animals traded for medicinal purposes; and develop
projects to assist Parties in implementing cites regulations
on traditional medicine.
INFORMATION MANAGEMENT STRATEGY: The Secretariat
introduced, and delegates approved, CITES’ information
management strategy (IMS) (Doc. 11.57). The Secretariat noted
the Convention’s website is the core source for information
dissemination to Parties and the public. The site contains
CITES-related information, including texts, resolutions and
decisions, and has links with other sites, such as TRAFFIC,
Interpol, WCO and others. IMS activities include: further
development of the CITES World Wide Web site, a study of
Internet connectivity in Africa, and a study of various
initiatives to improve telecommunications in Africa. Liberia
and Sierra Leone stressed the need for equipment assistance.
POTENTIAL RISK OF WILDLIFE TRADE TO THE TOURISM INDUSTRY:
On Thursday, 13 April, Kenya introduced its proposal
recommending minimizing impacts of tourism (Doc. 11.58). He
stressed the high economic returns activities, such as
tourism, compared to those deriving from products from dead
animals. A majority of the delegates opposed the resolution
and others concurred with the Secretariat on the lack of
evidence to support a relationship between experimental trade
and increased poaching, and that with appropriate domestic
legislation on trade, tourism should not be threatened. On
Wednesday, 19 April, Kenya withdrew its proposal due to lack
of consensus.
CONSIDERATION OF PROPOSALS FOR AMENDMENT OF APPENDICES I
AND II
Delegates in Committee I considered 62 proposals to amend
Appendices I and II. The following is a summary of the Plants
Committee's proposals, which are clustered (Doc. 11.59.1),
proposals concerning export quotas (Doc. 11.59.2) and other
proposals for individual species (Doc. 11.59.3).
PLANTS COMMITTEE PROPOSALS: Inclusion in Appendix II:
Delegates decided to postpone a proposal on Harpagophytum
procumbens (Devil’s Claw) (Prop. 11.60) until COP-12 to
allow range States to collect additional data. The Secretariat
introduced an additional document (Com. 11.11) requiring range
and importing States to submit all available information
concerning the trade, management and biological status of the
species. The document was adopted.
Delegates adopted an amended proposal on dried specimens of
Adonis vernalis (False Hellebore) (Prop 11.61), which
emphasizes the need to designate all parts and derivatives,
instead seeds and pollen, and to accept chemical derivatives
and finished pharmaceutical products. Delegates also adopted
proposals to include Panax ginseng (Asian Ginseng) (Prop
11.54) and Cistanche deserticola (Desert-living Cistanche)
(Prop. 11.59).
Deletion from Appendix II: The Plants Committee explained
that species proposed for deletion from Appendix II are not
internationally traded or artificially propagated for trade.
Delegates adopted proposals for deletion of: Ceropegia spp
(Lantern Flower) (Prop. 11.1); Frerea indica (Prop. 11.2);
Byblis spp (Rainbow Plant) (Prop. 11.3); Cephalotus
follicularis (Albany Pitcher Plant) (Prop. 11.6); Lewisia
cotyledon (Heckner’s Lewisia) (Prop. 11.10); Darlingtonia
californica (Californian Pitcher Plant) (Prop. 11.11); and
Kalmia cuneata (White Wicky) (Prop. 11.57).
Uplisting to Appendix I: Delegates adopted proposals to
uplist Araucaria araucana (Argentinean Monkey Puzzle Tree)
(Prop. 11.55), and Guaiacum sanctum (Lignum Vitae) (Prop.
11.62). Delegates adopted an additional decision (Com. 11.25)
noting the Plants Committee will review Guaiacum sanctum and
assess its status in the wild and in trade.
Downlisting to Appendix II: Delegates adopted a proposal to
downlist Dudleya traskiae (Laguna Beach Liveforever) (Prop.
11.7), but decided to maintain Sclerocactus mariposensis
(Lloyd’s Mariposa Cactus) (Prop. 11.5) in Appendix I.
Delegates voted in favor of downlisting Disocactus macdougalli
(MacDougall’s Cactus) (Prop. 11.4), but agreed the Plants
Committee should conduct additional research on the species.
Annotations: Delegates adopted a proposal changing the
current listings of Cyatheaceae and Dicksoniaceae (Tree Ferns)
(Prop. 11. 8). Delegates also adopted a proposal to harmonize
exemptions related to medicinal products by combining a
current annotation for Podophyllum hexandrum and Rauvolfia
serpentina (Himalayan May-apple) with an annotation for Taxus
wallichiana (Prop. 11.53). Chile withdrew a proposal on
Echinopsis spp, Eulychnia and other Bolivian Cactaceae used in
the fabrication of rainsticks (Prop 11.56) and suggested
instead amending resolution 9.18 to include a paragraph on
rainsticks. Delegates adopted the new decision. The
Secretariat introduced, and delegates adopted, a proposal on
Echinopsis spp. (Com. 11.15) recommending Parties to harmonize
their national legislation related to personal exemptions.
PROPOSALS BY FAUNA SPECIES: Nile Crocodile: Tanzania
presented, and delegates adopted, a proposal to maintain the
export quota of Tanzanian populations of Nile Crocodiles
(Prop. 11.12).
Asian Pangolin: On Friday, 14 April, Nepal introduced a
proposal to uplist the Indian, Chinese and Malayan pangolin to
Appendix I (Prop. 11.13), noting extensive harvesting for
parts and massive trade. An informal redrafting group was
established. On Wednesday, 19 April, the US introduced the
amended proposal, which retains these species in Appendix II
with a zero quota. The proposal was adopted.
Black Sea Bottlenose Dolphin: On Friday, 14 April, the US,
supported by Turkey, Romania and Fiji, proposed uplisting the
Black Sea Bottlenose Dolphin to Appendix I (Prop. 11.14). Some
delegations, including the EU and Japan, opposed, and a
drafting group was established. On Wednesday, 19 April, the US
presented a draft decision (Com. 11.23) that does not uplist
the species, but calls on range States and the Animals
Committee to assist in evaluating the species status. It also
urges Parties to prohibit export of live dolphins without
evidence of proper receiving facilities from a
destination-based Management Authority. The decision was
adopted.
Downlisting Gray and Minke Whale Stocks: JAPAN introduced
proposals to downlist from Appendix I to Appendix II (Prop.
11.15), the Southern Hemisphere stock of Minke Whale (Prop.
11.16), and Okhotsk Sea-West Pacific stock of the Minke Whale
(Prop. 11.17). He remarked that none of these stocks meet the
biological criteria for Appendix I listing, underscored that
import controls prevent illegal trade, and emphasized that
there is no evidence of illegal trade in whale products.
Several delegations, including the EU, the US, New Zealand,
the Czech Republic, Australia, Monaco, Slovakia, Vanuatu and
Fiji, expressed their support for IWC’s primacy, and opposed
downlisting any species subject to the IWC moratorium. Many of
the same delegations acknowledged the IWC efforts to establish
an appropriate management regime, but stressed that no such
scheme exists yet. The IWC said a management scheme must be
developed before commercial whaling can resume. Norway said
Parties are paralyzing a CITES position on whaling by taking
refuge in the IWC. Iceland, Antigua and Barbuda, Cuba,
Mongolia, Suriname, Bangladesh, and Saint Vincent and the
Grenadines supported the proposals, with some citing concerns
over food security. The International Fund for Animal Welfare
said regulation of whale products in consumer countries is
very poor, and cited examples of endangered whale species
products in consumer markets.
Eastern North Pacific Gray Whale: Regarding the Gray Whale,
the US cautioned that the Western stock is endangered, and
that downlisting the Eastern North Pacific stock would result
in a split-listing and further endanger the Western stock. The
IWC cited recent data implying illegal Gray Whale meat in
markets. Japan requested a secret ballot vote and the proposal
was rejected.
Southern Hemisphere Minke Whale: Japan amended this
proposal to reserve trade to Parties maintaining an
appropriate DNA procedure. Australia said the proposal failed
to establish separate population estimates for the two species
detected by the IWC Scientific Committee. Delegates rejected
the proposal by a secret ballot vote. Suriname proposed an
amendment to Japan’s proposal to transfer the stock to
Appendix II and maintain a zero quota until COP-12, assuming
that the IWC will have taken a decision on its revised
management system by then, and will have set a quota that
could be applicable to CITES. Suriname requested a secret
ballot vote and the proposal was rejected.
Okhotsk Sea-West Pacific Minke Whale: Japan amended its
proposal to limit trade to Parties that have DNA
identification methods. The proposal was rejected by secret
ballot.
Northeast Atlantic and North Atlantic Central Minke Whale:
Norway introduced its proposal to downlist the Northeast
Atlantic and the North Atlantic Central stocks of Minke Whale
(Prop. 11.18). Norway highlighted domestic monitoring
mechanisms, including DNA testing. He called for an ecosystem
approach to conservation, which incorporates human needs.
Iceland, Japan and Cuba supported the proposal, stressing that
these species are not endangered. The EU opposed, noting it is
premature to state that DNA tracking techniques are approved.
The US opposed, cautioning against permitting trade without
adequate monitoring. Greenpeace International said allowing
any trade would encourage illicit trade. Delegates rejected
the proposal with a secret ballot vote.
In Plenary on Thursday, 20 April, Norway called to reopen
the debate on the Minke Whale and, supported by Japan and
Iceland, amended its initial proposal to limit trade to
products from animals taken within national jurisdiction with
countries where DNA-based identification systems for trade
control are implemented. The US and others opposed, noting
that downlisting this species would signal the resumption of
commercial whaling. The proposal was rejected.
Brown Hyena: Switzerland introduced a proposal to remove
the Brown Hyena from Appendix II (Prop. 11.19), noting no
trade impacts on the species had been recorded. Delegates
adopted the proposal.
African Elephant: Cameroon, speaking for a Friends of the
Chair group, announced a compromise whereby ivory trade will
be prohibited until COP-12 and the African Elephant
populations for Botswana, Namibia, Zimbabwe and South Africa
remain listed on Appendix II.
South Africa introduced its proposal to transfer its
elephant population to Appendix II (Prop. 11.20). He amended
his proposal to a zero quota for ivory trade. The proposal was
adopted, as amended, and provides for trade in hides and
leather goods and in hunting trophies and for non-commercial
purposes. Botswana withdrew its proposal to maintain its
African Elephant population on Appendix II to allow for an
annual trade quota of 12 tonnes of ivory (Prop. 11.21).
Namibia withdrew its proposal on its elephant population
(Prop. 11.22), noting that proper management, law enforcement
and involvement of local communities, rather than trade
prohibition, would deter poaching. Zimbabwe also withdrew its
proposal for an annual ivory trade quota of 10 tonnes (Prop.
11.23). He supported the use of elephant products rather than
killing for ivory, declared that conservation would come
through legalization and called for an efficient monitoring
system. Kenya and India withdrew their joint proposal (Prop.
11.24) to list all African Elephant populations in Appendix I.
The US noted an emerging consensus among range States on
elephant security and stated that ivory trade would be
perilous without an efficient monitoring system. Many
delegations, including the EU, Swaziland, Tanzania and Sierra
Leone, welcomed the consensus to withdraw the proposals.
Dugong: Australia introduced a proposal to uplist the
Australian Dugong population to Appendix I (Prop. 11.26),
eliminating the split-listing of the species. Switzerland and
Japan opposed, citing little evidence of illegal trade. The
US, Vanuatu, Indonesia, Madagascar, Israel, the United Arab
Emirates, Eritrea, Monaco, the Czech Republic and the
International Wildlife Coalition supported the proposal, which
was adopted.
Vicuña: Bolivia withdrew its proposal to downlist Appendix
I populations of Vicuña (Prop. 11.27), noting that live
shearing ensures sustainable use of the specimen. He
introduced, and delegates adopted, another proposal
eliminating the zero quota applicable to Appendix II Vicuña
species (Prop. 11.28).
Musk Deer: The US presented, as an alternative to its joint
proposal with India and Nepal to uplist the Musk Deer (Prop.
11.29), a draft decision and resolution (Com. 11.12, 13)
providing for, inter alia, trade monitoring by the Standing
and Animals Committees, Parties’ efforts to reduce trade,
alternatives to musk and financial assistance to range States.
The decision and resolution were adopted.
Urial: Germany introduced a proposal to list the
Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Pakistan Urial
subspecies on Appendix I and the Iran, Afghanistan, and
Kazakhstan subspecies on Appendix II (Prop. 11.30). Uzbekistan
noted some subspecies are already listed in Appendix II under
different taxonomic appellations. The proposal was adopted
with these amendments.
Darwin's Rhea: Argentina introduced, and delegates adopted,
a proposal to uplist its population of Darwin's Rhea to
Appendix I (Prop. 11.31).
Gyrfalcon: The US proposed downlisting its Gyrfalcon
population to Appendix II (Prop. 11.32). Several delegations
supported the proposal, but others opposed, indicating
possible enforcement problems, genetic pollution of other
populations, and opposition to creating a split listing. The
proposal was rejected.
Horned and Uvea Parakeets: France, on behalf of New
Caledonia, proposed uplisting the illegally traded Horned
Parakeet (Prop. 11.33) and Uvea Parakeet (Prop. 11.34) to
Appendix I. The proposals were adopted.
Melodious Laughing Thrush: China introduced its proposal to
list this species in Appendix II (Prop. 11.35). The US,
Malaysia and others supported. The EU and Japan opposed,
preferring placement in Appendix III. The proposal was
adopted.
Asian Box Turtles: Germany and the US introduced a proposal
to include four Box Turtle species in Appendix II. (Prop.
11.36). The proposal was adopted.
Spotted Turtle: The US outlined its proposal to include the
Spotted Turtle in Appendix II (Prop. 11.37), citing the
negative impact of international trade specifically for pet
collecting. The EU and Switzerland opposed, indicating that
domestic, rather than international, trade impacted the
species. The proposal was rejected by vote.
African Spurred Tortoise: France, recalling the
Precautionary Principle, presented its proposal to uplist this
tortoise (Prop. 11.38). Sudan, Togo, Benin and Ghana rejected
the proposal. France amended the proposal to an Appendix II
listing with a zero quota for wild species and the proposal
was adopted.
Pancake Tortoise: Kenya outlined its revised proposal,
co-sponsored by the US, requesting an Appendix II listing with
a zero quota for wild species (Prop. 11.39). Tanzania opposed,
noting that trade in wild species is already banned. Kenya
withdrew the proposal and agreed to work with Tanzania to
ensure wild species conservation.
Hawksbill Turtle: Cuba withdrew a proposal to downlist this
species allowing for an initial export to Japan of its
existing stockpile and an annual quota of 500 specimens
thereafter (Prop. 11.40). She instead urged Parties to support
a proposal allowing for a one-off sale with Japan (Prop.
11.41). She said specimens found in Cuban waters do not
warrant listing in Appendix I and noted Cuba's national
management programme to prevent illegal trade. Japan noted it
had made a reservation on the Appendix I listing of the
Hawksbill Turtle, upon joining CITES 20 years ago. The
Dominican Republic, Guinea, Honduras, Namibia, Mongolia,
Benin, Zimbabwe, Vanuatu, Jamaica, and Antigua and Barbuda
supported the proposal. The EU, Brazil, Kenya, the Bahamas,
the US and Canada opposed the downlisting, with many citing
the threat of illegal trade and the risk incumbent with
downlisting the whole population in Appendix II, especially
when migratory habits render its management difficult.
Delegates rejected the proposal.
In Plenary on Thursday, 20 April, Cuba reopened debate on
its proposals with an amendment stating that trade would not
take place until the control systems in Japan had been
reviewed by the CITES Standing Committee. Costa Rica opposed,
noting that the turtle is a migratory species and that a
one-off sale could encourage other countries to stockpile
shells. The proposal was narrowly defeated by secret ballot.
Reptiles and Amphibians: Germany and the US withdrew their
respective proposals on the Quince Monitor Lizard (Prop.
11.43) and the Timber Rattlesnake (Prop. 11.44). Delegates
adopted proposals to delete the Sonoran Green Toad from
Appendix II (Prop. 11.45) and to include the frog genus in
Appendix II (Prop. 11. 46).
Whale Shark: The US amended its proposal on Whale Sharks to
add the Great White and Basking Sharks for listing in Appendix
II (Prop. 11. 47). He highlighted over-exploitation and IUCN’s
characterization of the species as "rare," and said
this proposal could complement the FAO Plan of Action on the
species. The Czech Republic, Monaco, the Philippines, El
Salvador, the EU and TRAFFIC supported, while Indonesia
opposed, highlighting food security and species identification
concerns. Australia noted DNA techniques would guide
identification. Several others opposed, with most noting a
lack of evidence of threats resulting from commercial
exploitation and the absence of trade, as well as the
exclusive competence of the FAO. The proposal was rejected.
Great White Shark: Australia introduced its proposal to
list this species on Appendix I (Prop. 11.48), and amended the
proposal for an Appendix II listing. Kenya, the EU and New
Zealand supported the proposal, while Panama, Japan and
Singapore opposed. The proposal was rejected by a secret
ballot.
Basking Shark: The UK proposed including this species in
Appendix II (Prop. 11.49) to ensure its sustainable use. He
highlighted DNA testing available for identifying Basking
Shark products. The proposal was rejected by secret ballot. In
Plenary on Thursday, 20 April, the UK reopened debate on the
proposal, suggesting a 12-month implementation delay to enable
the identification and distribution of material. He added that
the UK had developed methodology for DNA testing for
differentiation of sharks from other similar species. The US,
Brazil and IUCN supported the proposal. Objecting, Norway said
CITES lacks the competence or rules to expand its tasks in
this area, which belongs to the FAO. The proposal was rejected
by a secret ballot.
Coelacanths: Germany introduced, and delegates adopted, a
proposal to list all coelacanths species in Appendix I (Prop.
11.50). Indonesia withdrew its proposal to list coelacanths
subspecies (Prop. 11.51), noting it would be redundant.
Eastern Hemisphere Tarantulas: Sri Lanka proposed an
Appendix II listing for the Eastern Hemisphere Tarantulas
(Prop. 11.52), noting the species has been subjected to
unsustainable collection for international trade, primarily to
Europe. The US regretted that only consuming countries opposed
the proposal, which was rejected.
CLOSING PLENARY
On Thursday, 20 April, COP-11 Chair Asadi convened the
final Plenary meeting and delegates finalized work on the
Minke Whale (Prop. 11.18), Hawksbill Turtle (Prop. 11.41), and
the Basking Shark (Prop. 11.49). On the date and venue of
COP-12 (Doc. 11.60), Chair Asadi noted the next COP would take
place in the later part of 2002. Chile offered to host COP-12
in Santiago.
In closing remarks, Nigeria called for the Secretariat’s
support for wildlife management and in carrying out a census
in their national parks and, on behalf of the G-77, solicited
global assistance toward sustainable development. The EU
expressed satisfaction at the outcome of the African Elephant
issue, noted it would support MIKE implementation and
stressing the importance of the Precautionary Principle. The
Born Free Foundation, on behalf of the 60 participants of the
Species Survival Network, noted CITES had gained
accountability by minimizing trade impacts on wildlife and
adopting important conservation decisions. Kenya thanked
participants and invited everyone to discover Kenya’s parks
and culture. CITES Deputy Secretary-General Jim Armstrong
thanked the Rapporteurs, interpreters and the UNON staff. UNEP
Executive Director Klaus Töpfer noted COPs are "a means
to an end," said the adoption of the Strategic Plan
cannot be over-emphasized, and welcomed synergies with other
Conventions. He thanked journalists for stimulating global
interest in CITES and underscored the role of civil society.
CITES Secretary-General Willem Wijnstekers declared COP-11 was
a success, said the outcome of the elephant issue was a
victory for the whole of Africa, and expressed concern over
implementation of the Strategic Plan in view of budget
reductions. Chair Asadi said he had entered COP-11 as an
amateur and leaves as an interested beginner. He thanked the
CITES Secretariat, delegations, NGOs, bureau members,
Committee Chairs, and gaveled the meeting to an end at 1:00
pm.
A BRIEF ANALYSIS OF COP-11
CITES COP-11 faced a loaded agenda, with over 40
resolutions and 62 proposals to amend the appendices. While
opinions on the success of COP-11 varied according to
country-specific interests, most delegates trumpeted the
compromise reached on elephants and the ivory trade as the
largest success of the meeting. While many also championed the
failure of proposals to allow for trade in some populations of
Gray and Minke Whales and the Hawksbill Turtle, others were
let down by the rejection of these proposals, and left COP-11
lamenting that CITES is not maintaining an evenhanded balance
between conservation and trade.
A DISPUTED CALLING: CONSERVATION VS. TRADE
A common grievance at COP-11 was that CITES has forgotten
its original calling as a conservation instrument, and is
evolving into a trade instrument. One delegate referred to
CITES as the "WTO of the environment." Some contend
that this is a result of the sudden rise in CITES’
membership over the last ten years, adding to the diversity of
interests among CITES Parties. Others point to a lack of
willingness to curb consumer markets for endangered species.
Much of the divide between the trade and conservation camps
can be attributed to philosophical differences, with
pro-traders supporting "sustainable use" and
pro-conservationists invoking the Precautionary Principle. The
former assert that when biological conditions for trade in
endangered species are met, and such use can be monitored and
controlled, trade should be allowed; if not, CITES deviates
from its mandate and loses legitimacy. While there is wide
agreement that, in principle, this is true, many find the
concept of "sustainable use" ambiguous and difficult
to translate on the ground. Monitoring systems would play a
critical role in implementing sustainable use, but many
contest that such systems are far from fool-proof and don't
account for the impact of other factors, such as limited
scientific knowledge of species and uncertainty of the impact
of environmental effects such as climate change.
Generally, there is agreement that CITES must apply the
Precautionary Principle, but some stress a need to clarify its
application. Consumptive users questioned the need and
feasibility of providing infallible evidence before allowing
commercial exploitation of a listed species. The debate
between sustainable use and precaution is only expected to
escalate in an increasingly trade-centered society, unless
evidence demonstrates that the greatest user value in a
specific species lies in non-consumptive use.
THE POLITICS OF SCIENCE
An element that complicated the negotiations at CITES was
the politics of science. Delegates repeatedly called for
decision-making that is science-based, not emotion-based.
However, a lack of conclusive data, inaccurate reporting, and
uncertainty within science itself complicates decision-making
on issues by allowing leeway for self-serving interpretations
or what one delegate referred to as "shockingly bad
science." For example, in the debates on whether to
downlist the Minke and Gray Whales to allow for commercial
fishing, the pro-whaling camp was quick to announce that
illegal trade can be effectively monitored through
state-of-the-art DNA identification technology. Opponents
stressed that this state-of-the-art technology has many
unresolved flaws, such as the inability to distinguish between
populations of a species.
Similarly, disputes on the impact of the one-off ivory
trade arose due to conclusions drawn by the Secretariat based
on reports from only eight elephant range States. Delegates
from countries that assert poaching increased as a result of
the one-off trade were dismayed by the Secretariat's
assessment that this does not appear to be ecologically
significant. For many, this led to criticism of the
Secretariat's passive approach to obtaining accurate data as
well as the Secretariat's role in providing an opinion.
CITES’ RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER INTERNATIONAL FORA
In the debate on CITES’ relationship with the IWC, some
delegates showed impatience for what they perceived as CITES’
hiding behind the IWC's moratorium on commercial whaling and
suggested severing the tight relationship between the two
organizations. Supporters of the IWC's primacy expressed
frustration that the main critics of the IWC’s
ineffectiveness are also the culprits paralyzing completion of
its management system.
For some, developing synergy with the FAO is the more
desirable route, with many also preferring to defer other
marine species, such as sharks and the touchy topic of species
introduced from the sea, to the FAO. However, unlike the IWC
and CITES, the FAO’s implementation of its plan of action is
voluntary.
The relationship between CITES and the CBD was scrutinized
in the context of diagnostic samples of species. The proposal
to eliminate permit requirements for cell culture, serum and
diagnostic samples for scientific purposes was perceived as a
back-door attempt to access genetic resources. However, some
concede that the CBD’s provisions are not effective, and
having the discussion within CITES may yield better results.
THE STRUGGLE TO TRANSLATE WORDS INTO ACTION
Perhaps the most important challenge facing CITES is
effective implementation. The 20% cut in CITES' mid-term
budget raises questions about the ability of the Secretariat
to implement the recently adopted Strategic Plan and its many
work activities, as well as to meet its obligations to a
growing membership, with 15 new developing country Parties
since COP-10. Some assert that the interests of developing
countries were sacrificed to achieve compromise on the budget,
with provisions for capacity building left contingent on
availability of funds. For many, this raised concerns about
the validity of placing trade sanctions on countries whose
requests for assistance to build capacity are not effectively
met, with some speculating that such action could compel
Parties to opt out of CITES. At COP-11, the logic of such
sanctions was brought into question by the suggestion that
sanctions be placed on India to encourage enforcement of tiger
conservation. From the Indian perspective, such a strike
against them is counterintuitive when its real need is
capacity building for patrolling poaching. As one delegate
questioned, how is an untrained, unarmed patrol man to curb
poachers toting weapons.
A QUESTION OF GOOD GOVERNANCE
As issues of governance become increasingly important in
multilateral fora, some of CITES standard procedures, such as
participation of NGOs, the use of secret voting, and the role
of the Secretariat in providing an opinion may need to evolve
to improve transparency. At COP-11, Committee Chairs
incorporated NGO contributions to the debate as they sought
consensus, and NGOs were welcomed in working groups and
drafting committees. The presence of the inflatable life-size
Greenpeace whale outside the UNEP reception area, distribution
of NGO materials in delegates’ mailboxes, although cleared
by the Secretariat in advance, and campaign posters directed
at specific Parties indicated for many that CITES fully
incorporates many civil society perspectives. However, some
are critical of such concessions, noting that the growing NGO
participation corresponds to increased deference of crucial
decisions to the Standing Committee, which is closed to
observers, taking away NGOs’ watchdog role in important
matters, and with it accountability and transparency in its
operations. Also, some Parties contest that secret votes open
a window of opportunity for delegates to coerce or buy votes,
as delegates are not held accountable to their country
positions. Although some concede there has been greater effort
at COP-11 and the previous four COPs to find consensus than to
vote, with secret ballots preferred over roll call votes,
obscuring transparency and accountability on decisions taken.
On various occasions at COP-11, many delegates perceived
that the Secretariat over-stepped its mandate to take
positions on issues and, at times, took sides on debates. Some
suggested this emanated from the challenge for the Secretariat
to balance its role in providing strong leadership while still
maintaining an advisory role, in light of competing interests.
Many hope the Secretariat will continue to provide balanced
recommendations based on sound science, without being
perceived as pushing an agenda.
AN ONGOING DIALOGUE
Delegates left COP-11 with a sense of accomplishment,
although no one delegation achieved everything it had hoped
for. Many decisions taken at COP-11 are far from the final
story. The compromise on African Elephants is a temporary
solution, providing a respite only until COP-12. With the next
meeting of the IWC in a matter of weeks, debates on commercial
whaling and DNA identification systems will surface again
soon. Given the delicate balancing act between trade and
conservation within CITES, it is doubtful that issues with
such high stakes will ever be resolved in absolute terms. As
one delegate summed up, "these may not be the best
solutions, but they are the best compromises."
THINGS TO LOOK FOR
15TH GLOBAL BIODIVERSITY FORUM: SHARING THE BENEFITS FROM
BIODIVERSITY. This meeting will take
place from 12-14 May 2000, in Nairobi, Kenya. Workshops will
be organized on linkages between biodiversity and poverty
alleviation; instruments for access and benefit-sharing from
genetic resources; and agricultural biodiversity and
sustainable livelihoods. For more information, contact:
Laurence Christen, Global Biodiversity Forum 15-Nairobi/COP-5,
IUCN-The World Conservation Union, 28 Rue Mauverney, CH-1196
Gland, Switzerland; tel: +41-22-999-0001; fax:
+41-22-999-0025; e-mail: lac@hq.iucn.org; Internet: http://www.iucn.org/
themes/gbf/index.html
CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY: The fifth
Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biodiversity
will be held from 15-26 May 2000, in Nairobi. For more
information, contact: CBD Secretariat, World Trade Center, 393
St. Jacques W., Suite 300, Montreal, Quebec, H2Y 1N9, Canada;
tel: +1-514-288-2220; fax: +1-514-288-6588; e-mail: chm@biodiv.org;
Internet: http:// www.biodiv.org
TENTH MEETING OF STATES PARTIES TO UNCLOS: The tenth
meeting of the Parties to the UN Convention on the Law of the
Sea will convene from 22-26 May 2000, in New York. For more
information, contact: UN Division for Ocean Affairs and the
Law of the Sea; e-mail: doalos@un.org; Internet: www.un.org/Depts/los/
index.html
FAO Technical Consultation on the Suitability of the CITES
Criteria for Listing Commercially-exploited Aquatic Species:
This meeting of government representatives will be held in
Rome, Italy, from 28-30 June 2000. For more information,
contact: Mr. K. Cochrane, Fishery Resources Officer, Marine
Resources Service (FIRM), FAO, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla;
00100 Rome, Italy; tel: +39-6-57051152; fax: +39-6-57053152;
e-mail: FI-Inquiries@fao.org; Internet: http://www.fao.org/fi/meetings/meetings.asp
INTERNATIONAL WHALING COMMISSION: The Fifty-Second Annual
Meeting of the International Whaling Commission will be held
from 3–6 July 2000, in Adelaide, Australia. It will be
preceded by meetings of a number of Committees, Sub-committees
and Working Groups. For more information, contact IWC: The Red
House, 135 Station Road, Impington, Cambridge, UK, CB4 9NP;
tel: +44-1223-233971; fax: +44-1223-232876; e-mail: iwc@iwcoffice.org.
WTO COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND ENVIRONMENT: The World Trade
Organization's Committee on Trade and Environment is scheduled
to meet from 5-6 July and 24-25 October 2000, in Geneva. The
meeting to be held from 5-6 July will include an information
session with selected Secretariats of Multilateral
Environmental Agreements. The meeting scheduled for 24-25
October will consider issues relating to market access, as
well as the linkages between the multilateral environment and
trade agendas. For more information, contact: Sabrina Shaw,
Secretary of the CTE, WTO, 154 rue de Lausanne, CH 1211 Geneva
21, Switzerland; tel: +41-22-739-5482; e-mail: Sabrina.shaw@wto.org;
Internet: http://www.wto.org/wto/ environ/te030.htm. For
schedule updates visit: http://www.wto.org/ wto/about/meets.htm
IIFET 2000 - microbehavior and MacroBenefits: The
International Institute of Fisheries, Economics and Trade (IIFET)
will hold its 2000 Conference from 10-14 July 2000, in
Corvallis, Oregon, USA. IIFET 2000 will deepen understanding
of market behavior, its effect on fisheries, and the
consequences of public policies, from resource management to
international trade. For more information, contact: Pam
Garland, IIFET 2000 Conference Coordinator, PO Box 2423,
Corvallis OR, 97339-2423, USA, tel: +1-541-754-9080; fax:
+1-541-752-5450; e-mail: garlandp@peak.org; Internet: http://osu.orst.edu/dept/IIFET/2000/
EUROBATS MOP-3: The Third Meeting of the Parties to the
Agreement on the Conservation of Bats in Europe will convene
from 24-26 July 2000, in Bristol, England. For more
information, contact: Andreas Streit, EUROBATS; tel:
+49-228-815-2420; fax: +49-228-815-2445; e-mail: eurobats@uno.de;
Internet: http://www.eurobats.org
CMS STANDING COMMITTEE: The Standing Committee of the
Convention on Migratory Species will convene from 21-22
September 2000, in Bonn, Germany. For more information,
contact: UNEP/CMS Secretariat, United Nations Premises in
Bonn, Martin-Luther-King-Str. 8, D-53175 Bonn,
Germany; tel: +49-228-815 2401/ 2; fax: +49–228-815 2449;
e-mail: cms@unep.de; Internet: http:// www.wcmc.org.uk/cms/
FAO Technical Consultation on Illegal, Unreported and
Unregulated Fishing: This meeting of government
representatives will take place in Rome, Italy, from 2-6
October 2000. For more information, contact: Mr. D. Doulman,
Senior Fishery Liaison Officer International Institutions and
Liaison Service (FIPL), FAO, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla;
00100 Rome, Italy; tel: +39-6-57-051; fax: +39-6-57053152;
e-mail: FI-Inquiries@fao.org; Internet: http://www.fao.org/fi/meetings/meetings.asp
IUCN WORLD CONSERVATION CONGRESS: The Congress will be held
in Amman, Jordan, from 4-11 October 2000. The theme of the
Amman Congress is "ecospace," a term indicating that
environmental protection at various geographical scales is a
prerequisite for the social, economic, and even political
security of people. It will link ecosystem conservation with
the need to stem the global loss of biodiversity, and thus
build on IUCN's traditional strengths in species and protected
areas. For further information, contact the Congress Unit at
IUCN USA Multilateral Office, 1630 Connecticut Avenue, NW, 3rd
Floor, Washington DC 20009-1053; tel: +1-202-387-4826;
fax:+1-202-387-4823; e-mail: jth@iucn.org or postmaster@iucnus.org;
Internet: http://www.iucn.org/amman/index.html
FIRST North American Symposium on the Linkages between
Trade and Environment: This symposium, organized by the
NAFTA Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) will be
held in Montreal, Canada, from 11-12 October 2000. For more
information contact: Scott Vaughan, Commission for
Environmental Cooperation, 393 St.-Jacques W., Room 200,
Montreal, Quebec, H2Y 1N9 Canada; tel: +1-514-350-4302; fax:
+1-514-350-4314; e-mail: svaughn@ccemtl.org; Internet:
www.cec.org
FAO Technical Consultation on Eco-labelling of Fish and
Fishery Products from Marine Capture Fisheries: This
meeting of government representatives will be held in Rome,
Italy, from 17-20 October 2000. For more information, contact:
Mr. R. Willmann, Senior Fishery Planning Officer, Development
Planning Service (FIPP), FAO, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla;
00100 Rome, Italy; tel: +39-6-57051152; fax: +39-6-57053152;
e-mail: FI-Inquiries@fao.org; Internet: http:// www.fao.org/fi/meetings/meetings.asp
CITES COP-12: The twelfth CITES Conference of the
Parties will be held in the latter half of 2002. Chile has
offered to host COP-12 in Santiago. |
This issue of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin
© <enb@iisd.org> is written and edited by Leanne Burney <leanne@iisd.org>,
Laura Ivers <laurai@iisd.org>, Violette Lacloche <violette@iisd.org>,
Wagaki Mwangi <wags@usa.net> and Mark Schulman <markschulman@hotmail.com>.
The Digital Editor is Andrei Henry <andrei@iisd.org>. The Editor
is Pamela S. Chasek, Ph.D. <pam@iisd.org> and the Managing
Editor is Langston James Goree VI <kimo@iisd.org>. The
Sustaining Donors of the Bulletin are The Netherlands Ministry
of Foreign Affairs, the Government of Canada (through CIDA and DFAIT),
the United States (through USAID), the Swiss Agency for Environment,
Forests and Landscape (SAEFL), the United Kingdom Department for
International Development (DFID) and the European Commission (DG-ENV).
General Support for the Bulletin during 2000 is provided by the
German Federal Ministry of Environment (BMU) and the German Federal
Ministry of Development Cooperation (BMZ), the Danish Ministry of
Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Environment of Austria, the
Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Environment of Norway, the Ministry
of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of Environment of Finland, the
Government of Sweden, the Government of Australia, the United Nations
Development Programme (UNDP), the Global Environment Facility (GEF)
and BP Amoco. Logistical support has been provided at this meeting by
UNEP and the CITES Secretariat. The Bulletin can be contacted
by e-mail at <enb@iisd.org> and at tel: +1-212-644-0204; fax:
+1-212-644-0206. IISD can be contacted by e-mail at <info@iisd.ca>
and at 161 Portage Avenue East, 6th Floor, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 0Y4,
Canada. The opinions expressed in the Earth Negotiations Bulletin
are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of
IISD and other funders. Excerpts from the Earth Negotiations
Bulletin may be used in non-commercial publications only and only
with appropriate academic citation. For permission to use this
material in commercial publications, contact the Managing Editor.
Electronic versions of the Bulletin are sent to e-mail
distribution lists and can be found on the Linkages WWW server at
http://www.iisd.ca/linkages/. The satellite image was taken above
Nairobi �2000 The Living Earth, Inc. http://livingearth.com. For
information on the Earth Negotiations Bulletin, send e-mail to
<enb@iisd.org>. |