[Federal Register: June 1, 2007 (Volume 72, Number 105)]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
Conference of the Parties to the Convention on International
Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES); Fourteenth
Regular Meeting; Tentative U.S. Negotiating Positions for Agenda Items
and Species Proposals Submitted by Foreign Governments and the CITES
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
SUMMARY: We, the United States, as a Party to the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
(CITES), will attend the fourteenth regular meeting of the Conference
of the Parties to CITES (CoP14) in The Hague, The Netherlands, June 3-
15, 2007. This notice announces the tentative U.S. negotiating
positions on amendments to the CITES Appendices (species proposals),
draft resolutions and decisions, and agenda items submitted by other
countries and the CITES Secretariat for consideration at CoP14. With
this notice we also announce that we will publish a notice after the
conclusion of CoP14 to invite public input on whether the United States
should take a reservation on any of the amendments to the CITES
Appendices that are adopted.
DATES: In further developing U.S. negotiating positions on these
issues, we will continue to consider information and comments submitted
in response to our notice of February 21, 2007 (72 FR 7904). We will
also continue to consider information received at the public meeting
announced in that notice, which was held on April 9, 2007. We will
publish a notice after June 15, 2007, to invite public input on whether
the United States should take a reservation on any of the amendments to
the CITES Appendices that are adopted.
ADDRESSES: Comments pertaining to draft resolutions and decisions, and
agenda items should be sent to the Division of Management Authority;
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service; 4401 North Fairfax Drive; Room 700;
Arlington, VA 22203; or via e-mail at: email@example.com; or via fax at:
703-358-2298. Comments pertaining to species proposals should be sent
to the Division of Scientific Authority; U.S. Fish and Wildlife
Service; 4401 North Fairfax Drive; Room 750; Arlington, VA 22203; or
via e-mail at: firstname.lastname@example.org; or via fax at: 703-358-
2276. Comments and materials received will be available for public
inspection, by appointment, from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, at either the Division of Management Authority or the Division
of Scientific Authority.
With this notice, we announce that we will publish a notice after
the conclusion of CoP14 to invite public input on whether the United
States should take a reservation on any of the amendments to the CITES
Appendices that are adopted.
Information concerning the results of CoP14 will be available after
the close of the meeting on the Secretariat's Web site at http://www.cites.org
; or upon request from the Division of Management
Authority; or on our CITES Web site (http://international.fws.gov/cites/cites.html
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information pertaining to
resolutions and agenda items contact: Chief, Branch of CITES
Operations, Division of Management Authority; telephone, 703-358-2095;
fax, 703-358-2298; e-mail, email@example.com. For information pertaining to
species proposals contact: Chief, Division of Scientific Authority;
telephone, 703-358-1708; fax, 703-358-2276; e-mail,
The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild
Fauna and Flora (CITES or the Convention) is an international treaty
designed to control and regulate international trade in certain animal
and plant species that are now or potentially may become threatened
with extinction due to trade. These species are listed in the
Appendices to CITES, which are available on the CITES Secretariat's Web
site at http://www.cites.org/eng/app/index.shtml. Currently, 171
countries, including the United States, are Parties to CITES. The
Convention calls for regular meetings of the Conference of the Parties
(CoP) to review issues pertaining to implementation, makes provisions
enabling the CITES Secretariat to carry out its functions, consider
amendments to the list of species in Appendices I and II, consider
reports presented by the Secretariat, and make recommendations to
improve the effectiveness of CITES. Any country that is a Party to
CITES may propose and vote on amendments to Appendices I and II
(species proposals), draft resolutions and decisions, and agenda items
submitted for consideration by the Conference of Parties. Accredited
nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) may participate in the meeting as
approved observers and may speak during sessions when recognized by the
meeting Chairman, but they may not vote or submit proposals.
This is our fourth in a series of Federal Register notices that,
together with announced public meetings, provide you with an
opportunity to participate in the development of U.S. tentative
negotiating positions for CoP14. In this notice we announce the
tentative U.S. negotiating positions on species proposals, draft
resolutions and decisions, and agenda items submitted by other Parties
and the Secretariat for consideration at CoP14. We published our first
CoP14-related Federal Register notice on January 20, 2006 (71 FR 3319),
and with it we requested information and recommendations on species
proposals, draft resolutions and decisions, and agenda items for the
United States to consider submitting for consideration at CoP14. We
published our second such Federal Register notice on November 7, 2006
(71 FR 65126), and with it we requested public comments and information
on species proposals, draft resolutions and decisions, and agenda items
that the United States was considering submitting for consideration at
CoP14. On December 11, 2006, we held the public meeting announced in
our second Federal Register notice; at that meeting, we discussed the
issues contained in our November 7 Federal Register notice and in our
Web site posting on the same topic. In our third Federal Register
notice, published on February 21, 2007 (72 FR 7904), we announced the
provisional agenda for CoP14, solicited public comments on items on the
provisional agenda, and announced a public meeting to discuss
the agenda items. That public meeting was held on April 9, 2007.
You may obtain information on the above Federal Register notices
from the following sources. For information on draft resolutions and
decisions, and agenda items, contact the Division of Management
Authority (see ADDRESSES, above); and for information on species
proposals, contact the Division of Scientific Authority (see ADDRESSES,
above). Our regulations governing this public process are found in 50
CFR 23.31-23.39. Pursuant to 50 CFR 23.38(a), the Director has decided
to suspend the procedure for publishing a notice of final negotiating
positions in the Federal Register because time and resources needed to
prepare a Federal Register notice would detract from essential
preparation for CoP14.
Tentative Negotiating Positions
In this notice we summarize the tentative U.S. negotiating
positions on proposals to amend the Appendices (species proposals),
draft resolutions and decisions, and agenda items that have been
submitted by other countries and the CITES Secretariat. Documents
submitted by the United States for consideration of the Parties at
CoP14 can be found on the Secretariat's Web site at: http://www.cites.org/eng/cop/index.shtml.
Those documents are: CoP14 Doc.
18.2, CoP14 Doc. 39, and CoP14 Doc. 43. The United States also
submitted Document CoP14 Doc. 67 at the request of the Animals and
Plants Committees. The United States, either alone or as a co-
proponent, submitted the following proposals to amend Appendices I and
II: CoP14 Prop. 2, CoP14 Prop. 17, CoP14 Prop. 19, CoP14 Prop. 21,
CoP14 Prop. 22, CoP14 Prop. 23, CoP14 Prop. 28, and CoP14 Prop. 36. In
this notice, we will not provide any additional explanation of the U.S.
negotiating position for documents that the United States submitted.
The introduction in the text of each of the documents the United States
submitted contains a discussion of the background of the issue and the
rationale for submitting the document.
In this notice, numerals next to each agenda item or resolution
correspond to the numbers used in the agenda for CoP14 and posted on
the Secretariat's Web site. When we completed the notice, the
Secretariat had not yet made available documents for a number of the
agenda items on the CoP14 agenda. For several other documents, we are
still working with other agencies in the United States and other CITES
Parties to develop the U.S. negotiating position. The documents for
which we do not currently have tentative U.S. negotiating positions
are: CoP14 Doc. 10 and CoP14 Doc. 30.
In the discussion that follows, we have included a brief
description of each species proposal, draft resolution, draft decision,
and agenda item submitted by other Parties or the Secretariat, followed
by a brief explanation of the tentative U.S. negotiating position for
that item. New information that may become available prior to or at
CoP14 could lead to modifications of these positions. The U.S.
delegation will fully disclose changes in our negotiating positions and
the explanations for those changes during public briefings at CoP14.
The United States is concerned about the budgetary implications and
workload burden that will be placed upon the Parties, the committees,
and the Secretariat, and intends to evaluate all documents for CoP14 in
view of these concerns.
Opening Ceremony and Welcoming Addresses
The Secretariat will not prepare a document on these agenda items.
According to tradition, as the host country for CoP14, The Netherlands
will conduct an opening ceremony and make welcoming remarks.
1. Rules of Procedure (Doc. 1). Tentative U.S. negotiating
position: Support. The CITES Secretariat prepared Document CoP14 Doc.
1, the draft Rules of Procedure for CoP14. The draft Rules are
identical to those adopted for CoP13, except for several amendments
proposed to Rules 14 and 15, regarding the creation of the position of
an Alternate Chairman of the Conference, and Rule 28, regarding
submission of informative documents for the CoP. The United States
tentatively supports the draft Rules of Procedure and the amendments
proposed to Rules 14, 15, and 28, but plans to propose several
additional amendments to the text of these three Rules to clarify
2. Election of Chairman and Vice-Chairmen of the meeting and of
Chairmen of Committees I and II (No document). Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Undecided. According to tradition, the host
country--in this case, The Netherlands--will provide the Conference
Chairman. The United States will support the election of committee
Chairmen and a Vice-Chairman of the Conference who have the required
technical knowledge and skills and also reflect the geographic and
cultural diversity of the CITES Parties.
3. Adoption of the agenda (Doc. 3). Tentative U.S. negotiating
4. Adoption of the working programme (Doc. 4). Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Support. Prior to a CoP, the working programme is
provisional and changes may be made to it prior to the start of CoP14
or at the beginning of the CoP. The United States supports the
provisional working programme posted at the time this notice was
5. Credentials Committee
5.1 Establishment of the Credentials Committee (No document).
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided.
5.2 Report of the Credentials Committee (No document). Tentative
U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. The United States will follow the
work of the Credentials Committee and intervene as appropriate.
6. Admission of observers (Doc. 6). Tentative U.S. negotiating
position: Undecided. A document for this agenda item is not normally
distributed prior to the start of a CoP. National NGOs are admitted as
observers if their headquarters are located in a CITES Party country
and if the national government of that Party approves their attendance
at the CoP. International NGOs are admitted by approval of the CITES
Secretariat. After being approved as an observer, an NGO is admitted to
the CoP unless one-third of the Parties object. The United States
supports admission to the meeting of all technically qualified NGOs,
and opposes unreasonable limitations on their full participation as
observers at CoP14. In addition, the United States supports flexibility
and openness in the process for disseminating documents produced by
NGOs to Party delegates, which are vital to decision-making and
scientific and technical understanding.
7. Financing and budgeting of the Secretariat and of meetings of
the Conference of the Parties. Tentative U.S. negotiating position on
Agenda Items 7.1, 7.2, and 7.3: Undecided. These are comprehensive
documents that require extensive review, internal discussion, and
analysis of the financial implications for Parties and the impact on
the work of the Secretariat and the committees. The United States will
review the documents carefully, bearing in mind the need to balance
tasks with available resources. The United States advocates fiscal
responsibility and accountability on the part of the Secretariat and
the Conference of the Parties and plans to be an active participant in
the budget discussions at
CoP14. The voluntary annual contribution of the United States to CITES
is determined through our domestic budgeting process. The United States
believes it is necessary that the CITES Secretariat provide additional
information on budgetary and financial matters in relation to the
costed programme of work proposed in Document CoP14 Doc. 7.3. Until
such information is provided and analyzed, and discussed with the
Parties and the Secretariat, we will not be able to consider supporting
any increase in the budget of the Convention.
8. Committee Reports
8.1 Report of the Chairman of the Standing Committee (Doc. 8.1).
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: At the time this notice was
prepared, this document had not been posted on the Secretariat's
website. This report is largely a summary of activities conducted by
the Standing Committee, or particularly the Chairman, since CoP13. Many
of these activities are covered by other CoP14 agenda items.
8.2 Report of the Chairman of the Animals Committee (Doc. 8.2).
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Most of this document is a report
by the Chairman of his activities or a recounting of the proceedings of
meetings of the Animals Committee, and therefore not requiring a
position. The outcomes of some of the Animals Committee deliberations
are reflected in other agenda items for CoP14, where they are
elaborated more substantially. However, there are some specific
recommendations contained in the report requiring a position. These
(and the tentative U.S. position) include:
Draft decisions for Psittacus erithacus, derived from the
Review of Significant Trade in this species, calling for the
development of management plans by range countries, with assistance
from the Secretariat, subject to external funding (Support);
A draft decision for the Secretariat to convene, subject
to external funding, a workshop to initiate regional cooperation on
fisheries management for Tridacnidae (Support);
Extending Decision 13.93 to continue the review of the
Felidae, particularly the review of Lynx spp. and look-alike issues,
until CoP15 (Support);
Consider that the Parties, Animals Committee, and
Secretariat have complied with Decisions 13.95-13.97 related to fossil
corals (Support); and
Consideration of providing supplemental funding (US$30,000
annually) to the Chairman of the Animals Committee, especially if from
a developing country and where governmental or institutional support is
insufficient to fulfill the duties of the position (Unable to support
given the current budgetary situation for the Convention).
8.3 Report of the Chairman of the Plants Committee (Doc. 8.3).
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Most of this document is a report
by the Chairman of her activities or a recounting of the proceedings of
meetings of the Plants Committee, and therefore not requiring a
position. The outcomes of some of the Plants Committee deliberations
are reflected in other agenda items for CoP14, where they are
elaborated more substantially. However, there are some specific
recommendations contained in the report requiring a position. These
(and the tentative U.S. position) include:
A draft decision directed to range countries, regional
Plants Committee representatives, and the Secretariat to address the
management and enforcement needs of seven species of medicinal plants
from Asia, and to report on progress to the Plants Committee at its
17th and 18th meetings (Support);
Consideration by the Parties of ways to obtain
identification materials for plants listed in the Appendices given that
there is no longer a specific budget line for this activity (Support);
A draft decision directed to the Plants Committee and the
Secretariat to continue cooperation with the Convention on Biological
Diversity on the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (Support, as
amended by the Secretariat);
A draft decision directed to the Plants Committee to
develop principles, criteria, and indicators for making non-detriment
findings for timber and medicinal plant species (Support);
Renewal of Decision 13.54, which directs the Plants
Committee to continue to consider proposals to include additional
timber species in the Appendices, based on the outcomes of regional
workshops and other information (Support);
Consideration that the Plants Committee's work under
Decisions 13.51 and 13.52 regarding annotations of medicinal plants,
Decision 13.60 related to Harpagophytum, and Decision 13.72 regarding
monitoring effects of the revision of the definition of ``artificially
propagated'' have been completed (Support);
Draft decisions directed to the Parties and the Plants
Committee to monitor the effects of exempting the artificially
propagated hybrids of various orchid genera from CITES controls, and
consideration of whether the exemption of hybrids of additional genera
is advisable (Support); and
Draft decisions directed to the Parties, Plants Committee,
Secretariat, and inter-governmental and non-governmental organizations
(IGOs and NGOs) to address various issues related to trade in agarwood,
including capacity building, the making of non-detriment findings,
information sharing, definition of terms relating to agarwood,
development of identification and training materials, and
recommendations on appropriate units of measure for agarwood, as well
as consideration of potential annotations to exempt certain agarwood
specimens from CITES controls (Support, but with reservations regarding
the ability of the CoP to direct work to IGOs and NGOs, and also
regarding the scope of work and potential budget implications).
8.4 Joint report of the Chairmen of the Animals and Plants
Committees (Doc. 8.4). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: U.S.
position: Much of this document is a report by the Chairmen of the
Animals and Plants Committees recounting the proceedings of joint
meetings of the two committees, and therefore not requiring a position.
The outcomes of some of the deliberations of the two committees meeting
in joint session are reflected in other agenda items for CoP14, where
they are elaborated more substantially. However, there are some
specific recommendations contained in the report requiring a position.
These (and the tentative U.S. position) include:
Recommended Rules of Procedure for the two committees,
which follow longstanding practices and represent the committees' views
with regard to a practicable adaptation of the Rules of Procedure for
the Standing Committee (Support, with some amendments proposed by the
A draft decision directed to the Secretariat to publish
and distribute, subject to available funding, manuals for regional
representatives to the committees in the three languages of the
Convention (Support, as amended by the Secretariat);
A recommendation to eliminate Resolution Conf. 13.10 on
``Trade in invasive alien species'' and incorporate elements of it into
Resolution Conf. 10.4 on ``Cooperation and synergy with the Convention
on Biological Diversity,'' to reflect the limited role CITES can play
in addressing the problem of invasive species (Support); and
Draft decisions directed to the Parties, Standing
Committee, and Secretariat to provide support to the University of
Cordoba and the International University of Andalusia
(Spain) to support the continuation of the Master's course on
``Management, Access and Conservation of Species in Trade'' (Support).
8.5 Report of the Nomenclature Committee (Doc. 8.5). Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Undecided. The report contains numerous
recommendations regarding the adoption of standard nomenclatural and
taxonomic references for CITES-listed fauna and flora, and a program of
work and proposed budget for the next intersessional period. We are
still evaluating the references, and the proposed work and budget
9. Committee Elections and Appointments
9.1 Standing Committee (No document). Tentative U.S. negotiating
position: Support. Since the close of CoP13, the North American region
has been represented on the Standing Committee by Canada, serving as
the North American regional representative, and Mexico, serving as the
alternate representative. Canada and Mexico will continue to serve in
their current capacities until the end of CoP15.
9.2 Animals Committee (No document). Tentative U.S. negotiating
position: Support. Since the close of CoP14, the North American region
has been represented on the Animals Committee by Mr. Rodrigo A.
Medellin of Mexico, serving as the North American regional
representative, and up until May 2007, Mr. Robert R. Gabel of the
United States, serving as the alternate representative. Mr. Gabel has
now moved on to other duties as the Chief of the U.S. Management
Authority, and as such, the United States will provide a new alternate
representative who has yet to be determined.
9.3 Plants Committee (No document). Tentative U.S. negotiating
position: Support. Since the close of CoP14, the North American region
has been represented on the Plants Committee by Mr. Robert R. Gabel of
the United States, serving as the North American regional
representative, and Dr. Adrianne Sinclair, of Canada, serving as the
9.4 Nomenclature Committee (No document). Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Support. In its report to the CoP, the
Nomenclature Committee recommends, as also recommended in CoP14 Doc. 12
(on review of the scientific committees), submitted by the Standing
Committee, that the Nomenclature Committee be re-characterized as a
working group of the Animals and Plants Committees. However, we
anticipate that this will have little effect on the operation of the
Nomenclature Committee, and we expect the current Chairmen of this
committee, Dr. Ute Grimm of Germany (co-Chairman for Fauna) and Dr.
Noel McGuff of the United Kingdom (co-Chairman for Flora), to continue
in their positions, regardless of how this body is characterized.
11. CITES Strategic Vision: 2008-2013 (Doc. 11). Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: While the United States supports the revision and
updating of both CITES' Strategic Plan and the accompanying Action
Plan, we have significant concerns related to the revisions proposed in
Document CoP14 Doc. 11, which we communicated in comments to the
Strategic Plan Working Group (SPWG) following the 54th meeting of the
CITES Standing Committee (SC54). CITES developed its current (and
first) ``Strategic Vision Through 2005'' when the United States chaired
the Standing Committee. This earlier document was adopted at CoP11 and
was closely linked to an Action Plan, with practical and measurable
steps for the Parties, Secretariat, and other entities. The Action Plan
was developed in concert with the Strategic Vision to provide evidence
that the goals of the latter were being met. At CoP13 the Parties
adopted Decision 13.1, which extended the Strategic Vision through
CoP14, but also set in motion the process to revise and update both the
Strategic Vision and the Action Plan. Document CoP14 Doc. 11 represents
the output of the SPWG, taking into account the comments received from
Parties and NGOs on the draft Strategic Plan after SC54. The SPWG has
also prepared a draft resolution for consideration by the Parties at
CoP14 (Document Doc. 11 Annex, p. 4), and the ``CITES Strategic Vision:
2008-2013'' is included as a sub-annex to that document (pp. 5-12).
While the SPWG accepted some of the comments of the United States in
preparing this document, we remain concerned that the document would
direct CITES away from its core mission of monitoring and controlling
international trade in wildlife and plants. Although the ``CITES
Strategic Vision: 2008-2013'' does not prescribe or proscribe specific
actions by the Parties, if adopted, it is intended to provide guidance
for the evolution of CITES through 2013.
12. Review of the scientific committees (Doc. 12). Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Support. This document is submitted by the
Standing Committee. At SC54 in October 2006, the Committee adopted the
recommendations of an External Evaluation Working Group's review of the
CITES scientific committees (Animals, Plants, and Nomenclature), and
agreed to propose to CoP14 pertinent modifications to Resolution Conf.
11.1 (Rev. CoP13) and 12.11 (Rev. CoP13). The United States supports
adoption of the Standing Committee's recommendations that will enhance
the work and efficiency of the scientific committees. However, the
United States disagrees with the Secretariat's suggestion to merge the
13. Addis Ababa Principles and Guidelines for the Sustainable Use
of Biodiversity (Doc. 13). Tentative U.S. negotiating position:
Support. Document CoP14 Doc. 13 was prepared by the Plants and Animals
Committees, and is based on the outcome of discussions at the 22nd
meeting of the Animals Committee and 16th meeting of the Plants
Committee (PC16--Lima, Peru; July 2006). The committees focused on the
applicability of the Addis Ababa Principles and Guidelines for the
Sustainable Use of Biodiversity (Addis Ababa Principles) to the making
of non-detriment findings, and concluded that not all of the principles
and guidelines are directly relevant. The committees proposed that
Resolution Conf. 10.4 be amended to acknowledge the use of the Addis
Ababa Principles as a voluntary additional tool that can be used in
making non-detriment findings. The United States agrees with the
committees' conclusion that the Addis Ababa Principles are not always
applicable to the decision making process under CITES, and supports the
proposal to consider them as a voluntary additional tool that can be
used in making non-detriment findings.
14. CITES and livelihoods (Doc. 14; Argentina, China, Germany on
behalf of the European Community Member States, and Nicaragua).
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. In Document CoP14 Doc.
14, the proponents summarize the outcomes and recommendations from the
CITES and Livelihoods Workshop (Cape Town, South Africa; September
2006), and propose two draft decisions that build on those
recommendations. The first draft decision directs the Standing
Committee to assist in the development of tools and guidelines for the
Parties to use in examining the impacts of CITES regulation on human
well-being and the livelihoods of the poor. The second draft decision
directs the Secretariat to provide an assessment of the ways in which
the implementation of CITES has taken, or could take, into account
these impacts on the livelihoods of the poor.
Although we are supportive of considering human well-being and
livelihoods in the implementation of CITES, these considerations should
be separate from the objective scientific assessments required for
listings and making non-detriment findings. We are also concerned about
the budget implications of the proposed Decisions in this document.
15. National wildlife trade policy reviews (Doc. 15). Tentative
U.S. negotiating position: Support. In Document CoP14 Doc. 15, the
CITES Secretariat reported on progress made in implementing Decisions
13.74 and 13.75 and that the four pilot countries interested in
undertaking wildlife trade policy reviews, will be provided an
opportunity to share compiled and synthesized information on the
initial results from their wildlife trade policy reviews at a CoP14
side event. The Secretariat further recommends that interested
importing countries carry out national wildlife policy reviews in order
to provide a balanced view to exporting countries and facilitate a
better understanding of wildlife trade policy at both ends of the
international wildlife trade (supply and demand), and invites donors to
provide financial support to countries interested in preparing these
reviews. The Secretariat recommends renewing the deadlines in
Resolution Conf. 13.74 for reporting to the Standing Committee and
Conference of the Parties to SC57 and CoP15, and deleting a
recommendation calling for submission of project proposals in order to
seek financial support for preparation of trade policy reviews in
The United States looks forward to reviewing the results achieved
with the four pilot countries. However, given the overall lackluster
response of the Parties (7 out of 171 Parties expressed interest), this
is not high priority work of the CITES Secretariat. Implementation of
the Secretariat's recommendations would have budgetary implications
that must be weighed against priorities that are more urgent.
16. Capacity building (Doc. 16). Tentative U.S. negotiating
position: Oppose. This document from the CITES Secretariat proposes the
creation of an interactive CITES Virtual College for basic and more
advanced training in the Convention over the Internet. The Secretariat
proposes that this program could be linked to academic institutions. In
Document CoP14 Doc. 7.3 Annex 1, the CITES Secretariat estimates that
it would cost close to $1.6 million to run this program from 2009
through 2011. While the United States has always, and continues to be,
a strong supporter and proponent of training in the implementation and
enforcement of CITES, we do not support such an initiative with such
significant budget implications. There are already similar educational
and capacity-building programs and mechanisms that would be duplicated
by the development of such a program at the Secretariat (e.g., the
Masters and Doctoral courses conducted by the International University
of Andalucia, and current U.S. training offered in connection to
Regional Free Trade Agreements).
17. Cooperation between Parties and promotion of multilateral
measures (Doc. 17). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. At
the time this notice was prepared, this document had not been posted on
the Secretariat's Web site.
18. Cooperation With Other Organizations
18.1 Cooperation with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the
United Nations (Doc. 18.1). Tentative U.S. negotiating position:
Undecided on establishment of a Fishery Working Group within CITES;
support strengthening cooperation between CITES and United Nations Food
and Agriculture Organization (FAO) with regard to forestry and non-
timber forest products, but opposed to formalization of the
relationship through a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU). This document
was submitted by the CITES Secretariat. It provides a history of the
collaboration between CITES and FAO regarding marine listing and
implementation issues, and summarizes cooperative activities in recent
years related to queen conch, sturgeons, sharks, sea cucumbers, and
other species. Pointing to the success of collaborative efforts between
CITES and FAO on marine issues, the Secretariat recommends
strengthening cooperation with FAO on issues related to forestry and
non-timber forest products. The document includes draft decisions for
consideration by the Parties at CoP14. One of these decisions directs
the Secretariat to initiate discussions with FAO on strengthening and
formalizing cooperation between CITES and FAO with regard to forestry
and non-timber forest products. Another, directed to the Standing
Committee, would establish a Fishery Working Group to address practical
issues related to the implementation of the Treaty for fish and marine
The United States endorsed the establishment of the MoU with FAO on
marine issues that was finalized at SC54, and we fully support ongoing
cooperation between CITES and FAO regarding marine issues. FAO has
provided valuable advice and assistance to CITES on a number of marine
issues, including the development of listing criteria for marine
species and the formation of ad hoc expert advisory panels to evaluate
marine listing proposals prior to a CoP. We have endorsed the idea of a
marine working group in the past; in fact, at CoP10, the United States
submitted a document calling for the Standing Committee to establish a
temporary working group for marine fish species. However, given the
formalized cooperative arrangement with FAO, ongoing work in the
Animals Committee, and the desire to avoid duplication of effort, we
are uncertain of the need for establishing a Fishery Working Group
within CITES at this time. No information has been provided regarding
the proposed composition or the mandate of such a group. We will
develop a position as more information becomes available.
The International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO) promotes the
conservation and sustainable management of and trade in tropical forest
resources. We submitted a document for consideration at CoP14 (Doc.
18.2) that recognizes the importance of close cooperation between CITES
and ITTO in the consideration and implementation of CITES listings of
tropical timber species and recommends strengthening the cooperation
between the CITES and ITTO Secretariats. While we would also support
increased cooperation between CITES and ITTO regarding forestry and
non-timber forest products, we do not believe that it is necessary to
formalize the relationship through a MoU.
18.3 Statements from representatives of other conventions and
agreements (No document). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Not
19. Dialogue Meetings
19.1 Terms of reference for CITES dialogue meetings (Doc. 19.1).
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. Range country dialogue
meetings have occurred for the African elephant since 1996 and
hawksbill sea turtles since 2001. The Standing Committee instructed the
Secretariat to draft terms of reference for the organization and
conduct of dialogue meetings for any taxon. The Secretariat's draft was
reviewed at SC50 and approved with amendments at SC53 (July 2005). The
Standing Committee agreed with the Secretariat that the revised
document should be the basis for a draft resolution at CoP14. This
document incorporates the suggestions from the Standing Committee and
describes what a dialogue meeting is, who may call a
dialogue meeting, the organization of the meeting, how decisions are
made and communicated, and how the rules of procedure may be amended.
The United States participated in the SC53 discussions and generally
supports the document.
19.2 Results of the dialogue meeting on the African elephant (Doc.
19.2). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Not applicable. The African
elephant dialogue meeting is scheduled to be held in The Hague, The
Netherlands, immediately prior to the start of CoP14. When the document
is available, we will review it closely and develop our position. We
support the range States dialogue process for debating multinational
species issues, and the United States provided funding for this meeting
through a grant under the African Elephant Conservation Act.
Interpretation and Implementation of the Convention
Review of Resolutions and Decisions
20. Review of Resolutions
20.1 Resolutions relating to Appendix-I species (Doc. 20.1).
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. In Document CoP14 Doc.
20.1, the Secretariat puts forward two draft consolidated resolutions
relating to Appendix-I species. The first draft resolution is a
consolidation of the resolutions related to hunting trophies for
Appendix-I species, and the second draft resolution consolidates the
resolutions related to the conservation of and trade in specimens of
specific Appendix-I species. The United States has long supported the
efforts to consolidate resolutions related to Appendix-I species, as
long as such an approach continues to allow for the elaboration of
specific measures that may be needed for individual species and does
not result in a generic approach to the conservation of these rare and
20.2 General review (Doc. 20.2). Tentative U.S. negotiating
position: Undecided. At the time this notice was prepared, Document
CoP14 Doc. 20.2 was not available for review on the Secretariat's Web
site. Prior to CoP12, the Secretariat began a review of the existing
CITES resolutions to identify those that were difficult to implement,
redundant with other resolutions, or with outdated text. At CoP12 and
again at CoP13, the Secretariat proposed changes to and consolidations
of sections of several resolutions, which the Parties considered, and
some of which the Parties adopted. With Document CoP14 Doc. 20.2, the
Secretariat is continuing this review process by identifying a number
of resolutions for which it has proposed changes, consolidations, or
transfers of text to other resolutions.
21. Revision of Resolution Conf. 11.16 on ranching and trade in
ranched specimens of species transferred from Appendix I to Appendix II
(Doc. 21). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Oppose, but agree with
some aspects. While the United States agrees that reporting
requirements should request only appropriate information that is used
to monitor ranching operations and to determine that such operations
continue to meet the requirements agreed by the Parties in Resolution
Conf. 11.16, we do not agree with eliminating the collection of needed
information based on Parties' inability or unwillingness to submit a
complete report. Annual reporting must include sufficient information
to determine if ranching operations are having an adverse effect on
wild populations and that population trends are stable or increasing.
Regarding the revision to the definition of ``ranching,'' the
United States agrees that the definition should be amended, but does
not accept the proposed definition. The Parties should postpone a
revision of the definition of ``ranching'' in Resolution Conf. 11.16
until consideration of Document CoP14 Doc. 38, and if agreed, the
review proposed in that document has been completed.
22. Review of Decisions (Doc. 22). Tentative U.S. negotiating
position: Undecided. At the time this notice was prepared, Document
CoP14 Doc. 22 was not available for review on the Secretariat's Web
site. At CoP13, the Parties reviewed the current CITES decisions to
identify those that were long term in nature. For these long-term
decisions, the Parties adopted the transfer of their text into new or
existing resolutions. With Document CoP14 Doc. 22, the Secretariat is
continuing this process by identifying existing decisions that are
intended to be valid for a long term and making proposals for the
transfer of the relevant texts of these decisions into new or existing
Compliance and Enforcement Issues
23. Guidelines for compliance with the Convention (Doc. 23).
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. At CoP12, the Parties
directed the Standing Committee to develop guidelines for compliance
with the Convention and a working group was established at SC50 to
accomplish the task. The United States has been an active member of the
Working Group on Compliance and supports completion of the draft
guidelines at CoP14. The existing compliance mechanisms in the Treaty
and resolutions are effective and appropriate. We have worked to ensure
that the guidelines for compliance accurately describe those mechanisms
and do not go beyond what already exists by introducing new mechanisms
or procedures. Although significant progress was made and agreement was
reached on most of the text, some areas of disagreement remained after
SC54. Document CoP14 Doc. 23 was prepared by the Chairman of the
Working Group on Compliance and includes the draft guidelines and the
Chairman's recommendations for resolving remaining areas of
disagreement. The United States supports his recommendations because
they focus the guidelines on describing existing practice instead of
creating new compliance procedures.
24. National laws for implementation of the Convention (Doc. 24).
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. At the time this notice
was prepared, this document had not been posted on the Secretariat's
Web site. The United States strongly believes that the Convention's
effectiveness is undermined when Party States do not have adequate
national laws in place for implementing CITES, and we have previously
supported action by the Conference of the Parties to compel Parties to
adopt effective CITES implementing legislation.
25. Enforcement matters (Doc. 25). Tentative U.S. negotiating
position: Support. The United States supports the proposed decisions
relating to a meeting of the CITES Enforcement Experts Group and the
suggestion that Resolution Conf. 11.3 be revised. The United States
agrees that existing efforts to capture illegal trade information have
largely been unsuccessful and welcomes an opportunity to discuss the
issue so that illegal trade activities are better understood and
enforcement efforts to combat them are made more effective. The United
States also concurs with the Secretariat's assessment that, despite
remarkable efforts by dedicated wildlife enforcement officers around
the world, governments need to raise the profile of wildlife
enforcement and ensure that sufficient resources are devoted to
interdiction of illegal trade and prosecution of wildlife criminals.
26. Compliance and enforcement (Doc. 26; Germany, on behalf of the
European Community Member States). Tentative U.S. negotiating position:
Partial support. The United States agrees with many of the
Secretariat's concerns. The United States does not believe it is
necessary, at this point, to
establish a permanent Enforcement Experts Group. However, a second
meeting of this group is warranted to follow up on previous
recommendations and take up some of the issues identified in this
document as well as enforcement-related documents, such as Document
CoP14 Doc. 25 and Document CoP14 Doc. 28.
27. Disposal of illegally traded and confiscated specimens of
Appendix-II and -III species (Doc. 27; Indonesia). Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Oppose. The United States does not support the
proposed decision directed to the Standing Committee regarding
amendments to Resolution Conf. 9.10 (Rev. CoP13). Some of the issues
raised in Document CoP14 Doc. 27 and the proposed decision are clearly
addressed in existing resolutions. In addition, several of the issues
identified as possible amendments would raise enormous logistical,
financial, and workload challenges that would substantially outweigh
any possible conservation benefit for Parties that regularly confiscate
large volumes of wildlife. The proposed amendments to Resolution Conf.
9.10 (Rev. CoP13) included in this document, if adopted, could have a
negative conservation impact by discouraging Parties from confiscating
illegally traded wildlife if they were required to take on the
substantial logistical, financial, and workload burdens that would
accompany these requirements.
28. Internet trade in specimens of CITES-listed species (Doc. 27;
Germany, on behalf of the European Community Member States). Tentative
U.S. negotiating position: Support. The United States is concerned
about the role of the Internet in illegal wildlife trade and has
already devoted enforcement resources to this issue. The United States
supports the Secretariat's alternative draft decisions, which would be
a more efficient and cost-effective approach to the workshop.
29. National reports (Doc. 29). Tentative U.S. negotiating
position: Support with minor changes. With Document CoP14 Doc. 29, the
Secretariat reports on progress it and the Parties have made since
CoP13 in implementing Resolution Conf. 11.17 (Rev. CoP13) on national
reports, and on progress it has made in implementing Decisions 13.90-
13.92 on reporting requirements. The Secretariat recommends that the
Parties consider adopting two draft decisions included in Annex 2 of
Document CoP14 Doc. 29. The first draft decision, which the United
States supports, would direct the Standing Committee to undertake a
review of the CITES recommendations to Parties to provide special
reports, assess whether they might be effectively incorporated into the
annual and biennial reports, and report to CoP15 on its conclusions and
recommendations. The second draft decision would direct the Secretariat
to continue work directed under Decision 13.92 to facilitate the
harmonization of knowledge management and reporting with other
biodiversity-related conventions. This draft decision would continue
work directed under Decision 13.90 to identify ways to reduce reporting
burdens on Parties. The United States supports both of these aspects of
the draft decision. However, the second point of the draft decision
also directs the Secretariat to support the Standing Committee on
electronic permitting. The United States recognizes the potential
benefits electronic permitting could provide in relation to national
reports, but we are concerned about the potential financial impact on
some Parties and the limited capacity of many Parties to completely
implement electronic permitting (see the U.S. position on Document
CoP14 Doc. 40.1 and Document CoP14 Doc. 40.2). Therefore, the United
States, while supportive of most of the text of the second draft
decision, does not support inclusion of the phrase ``* * * its support
of the Standing Committee on electronic permitting* * *''
31. Monitoring of the implementation of the annotations to
Euphorbia spp. and Orchidaceae spp. included in Appendix II (Doc. 31;
Switzerland). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. Switzerland
has submitted a proposal for CoP14 to amend the annotation to
Orchidaceae (Prop. 34), and another proposal to amend the annotation to
Euphorbia spp. (Prop. 29). In Document CoP14 Doc. 31, Switzerland
explains that, if these two proposals are adopted, then it would be
appropriate to renew Decisions 13.98 and 13.99 to monitor the
implementation of the amended orchid annotation, and also adopt similar
decisions to monitor the implementation of the amended Euphorbia
annotation. In the Annex to Document CoP14 Doc. 31, Switzerland
provides the draft renewals of Decisions 13.98 and 13.99, plus two new
similar draft decisions on the Euphorbia annotation. The United States
agrees that, if the species proposals amending the Euphorbia annotation
and the orchid annotation are adopted at CoP14, then the Parties should
also adopt decisions to monitor the implementation of these amended
annotations, in order to determine how effective they are and whether
they are causing any significant enforcement difficulties. It is also
the U.S. position that, if these two proposals are not adopted,
Decisions 13.98 and 13.99 should still be continued.
32. Incentives for implementation of the Convention (Doc. 32).
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Oppose. Document CoP14 Doc. 32
reviews Decisions 13.76 and 13.77, and summarizes the issues involved
in incentives for implementation of the convention. The Secretariat's
lists numerous recommendations, including the creation of a working
group to identify options for CITES Authorities in designing and using
specific incentive measures.
While the United States does not have any fundamental objections to
the use of economic incentives to further wildlife conservation in the
context of CITES, the text of the Convention is silent on this matter.
Although careful and detailed consideration must be given by the
Parties prior to incorporating these concepts and specific
recommendations into the body of CITES soft law, we note that the
Secretariat's report indicates that there was no response from Parties
to the Notification calling for submissions on economic incentives
(2005/022). We, therefore, have questions about the value of this work
to the CITES Parties. The report presents interesting information to
the Parties, but given the lack of interest, this work can be
successfully brought to a close and this agenda topic retired. Specific
work, such as the survey of fee structures is valuable in its own right
as an implementation item, but other proposed decision elements
directed to the Standing Committee, the Parties, and the Secretariat
are not a priority and should not be supported.
Trade Control and Marking Issues
33. Introduction from the sea (Doc. 33). Tentative U.S. negotiating
position: Support. This document was prepared by the CITES Secretariat
on behalf of the Standing Committee and reports on progress made since
CoP13 on issues related to introduction from the sea. In 2005, a
workshop on introduction from the sea was convened in accordance with
Decision 13.18. The report of the workshop, the comments received on
the report, and a draft resolution and draft decision prepared by the
Secretariat were considered at SC54. It was agreed that a working group
would work electronically to refine the definition of the ``marine
environment not under the jurisdiction of any State'' based on issues
raised at SC54 and comments on the workshop report.
Document CoP14 Doc. 33 includes a draft resolution that contains both
the definition agreed by the workshop and an alternative definition put
forward by the working group. The Standing Committee recommends that
the CoP reach agreement on the bracketed text and adopt the resolution
to provide a definition of the ``marine environment not under the
jurisdiction of any State.'' The United States has been actively
involved in discussions related to introduction from the sea since the
drafting of the Treaty, and we strongly support continuing efforts to
achieve common understanding of the practical application of the
introduction from the sea provision under CITES. We participated in the
2005 workshop and the electronic working group following SC54. We
strongly support adoption of the draft resolution with the alternative
definition put forward by the working group in place of the definition
agreed at the 2005 workshop.
Document CoP14 Doc. 33 also includes a draft decision directed to
the Standing Committee. The decision calls for the establishment of a
working group on introduction from the sea, to work primarily through
electronic means, to consider further clarification of terms and other
issues identified in the 2005 workshop report. The working group would
be asked to report its findings to CoP15. The United States believes
that, given the increasing number of listing proposals for marine
species at recent CoPs, continued work on the practical implementation
of the introduction from the sea provision is important, and we
therefore support the formation of such a working group.
34. Trade in Appendix-I species (Doc. 34). Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Based on the results of the United Nations
Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC)
analysis reported at SC54, most trade in Appendix-I species reported by
the Parties is conducted appropriately. However, UNEP-WCMC noted that
further clarification of the purpose of transaction codes would be
useful, and that countries also need to show greater care in applying
source codes. The United States supports the need to clarify further
the use of certain purpose of transaction and source codes so that
there is more uniformity in how codes are used. As identified in
Document CoP14 Doc. 38, the Animals Committee and Plants Committee were
unable to make significant progress on production systems and source
codes and have proposed a more narrow scope of work to develop a
definition of ranching for application to CITES for CoP15. The United
States submitted a document (CoP14 Doc. 39) proposing refinements to
the purpose of transaction codes, to eliminate duplicities and ensure
better usage by the Parties.
35. International expert workshop on non-detriment findings (Doc.
35; Mexico). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. The
Scientific Authority of each Party is required to make non-detriment
findings for species listed in Appendix I and Appendix II. However,
many countries lack financial and technical resources and expertise to
fully meet this obligation. The proposed workshop on making CITES non-
detriment findings will improve Parties abilities to make
scientifically sound findings, build regional capacity, and foster
greater cooperation among Parties to effectively implement the
The proposed workshop is an initiative that grew out of discussions
among the three Parties in the North American Region of CITES--Canada,
Mexico, and the United States. The United States is fully supportive of
this workshop. We believe that strengthening the capacities of CITES
Scientific Authorities will help to ensure that trade in CITES-listed
species does not occur at levels that threaten their survival.
36. Management of annual export quotas (Doc. 36). Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Support, provided negotiated changes to the text
of the draft resolution will advance and support the establishment,
implementation, and monitoring of nationally established export quotas
for Appendix-II species. The United States initiated discussion of this
issue at CoP12 and has been an active participant in the Standing
Committee's Export Quota Working Group (EQWG). This document accurately
reflects the discussions of the EQWG since CoP13, which has made
significant progress in developing a draft resolution and amendments to
existing resolutions that would cover this issue. Although substantive
issues remain unresolved, as reflected in Document CoP14 Doc. 36, the
United States hopes that, with further discussion at CoP14, a final
draft resolution can be agreed and adopted. The United States has
participated in these deliberations with a goal of ensuring that export
quotas for CITES-listed species provide a meaningful tool for
monitoring and controlling trade by providing a feedback mechanism for
importing countries to communicate irregularities and potential illegal
trade to exporting countries.
37. Appendix-I Species Subject to Export Quotas
37.1 Leopard export quotas for Mozambique (Doc. 37.1; Mozambique).
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Oppose. In this document,
Mozambique proposes to increase its export quota for leopard hunting
trophies and skins for personal use from 60 to 120. The United States,
as reflected in the document we submitted for CoP12 on establishing
scientifically based quotas, and in accordance with Resolution Conf.
9.21 (Rev. CoP13), which calls for establishment of a scientific basis
for proposed quotas, is very interested in ensuring that annual export
quotas are established on strong biological data. Mozambique's request
does not provide enough biological information about the population of
leopards or their prey in Mozambique to determine whether the
population can be sustained under the proposed quota figure.
37.2 Black rhinoceros export quotas for Namibia and South Africa
(Doc. 37.2; Kenya). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided.
Kenya is proposing to rescind Resolution Conf. 13.5, which allows
Namibia and South Africa to export five black rhino sport-hunted
trophies annually. Kenya has provided information about management
problems in Namibia and increased levels of rhino poaching in South
Africa since the exports were approved at CoP13 in 2004. However, this
information is contradicted by a report on the status and trade of
rhinos produced by the IUCN-SSC's African Rhino Specialist Group (CoP14
Doc. 54), which reports an increase in the black rhino population in
both countries and very limited rhino poaching in Namibia or South
Africa. Although Kenya fails to provide information to show that the
existing quota is biologically unsustainable or that range-wide
poaching of black rhinos has increased as a result of the export of
sport-hunted trophies, their document does raise questions that should
be addressed by Namibia and South Africa prior to the United States
finalizing its position on this document. It should be noted that this
species is listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act and
that the import of a black rhinoceros sport-hunted trophy into the
United States must meet additional regulatory requirements.
38. Production systems for specimens of CITES-listed species (Doc.
38). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. The United States
has been an active participant in the discussion of production systems
and source codes, by chairing an intersessional joint working group of
the Animals and Plants Committees on the subject. We agree that
additional discussions with a
narrower focus on ranching are warranted, as described in the document.
40. Electronic Permitting
40.1 Report of the Secretariat (Doc. 40.1). Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Oppose. The United States believes that the
majority of Parties do not and will not have the technological or
financial support to fully implement an electronic permitting system,
now or in the near future. Given the complexity of this effort and the
current state of technology, the United States believes that this does
not represent a high-priority activity at this time, particularly given
the current budget atmosphere.
40.2 Report of the Standing Committee's Working Group (Doc. 40.2).
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Oppose. See discussion on Document
CoP14 Doc. 40.1 above.
41. Transport of live specimens (Doc. 41). Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Support. In Document CoP14 Doc. 41 (Rev. 1), the
Secretariat summarizes work done by the Transport Working Group and
presents a revision of Resolution Conf. 10.21 on ``Transport of live
animals'' to ``Transport of live specimens'' by including the transport
of plants. Other changes would limit review of shipment mortality to
only those shipments with high mortality.
The United States is generally in favor of the revisions to
Resolution Conf. 10.21, in particular the inclusion of plants, which
will result in a more comprehensive resolution. While the United States
continues to be interested in all mortality during shipment, we realize
that this presents a burden on already-taxed inspectors and customs
officials, and agree with the new language in the revision that calls
for the Animals and Plants Committees to examine high-mortality
shipments of live specimens.
The United States is in favor of efforts to provide comprehensive
information on the best methods for live animal and plant transport.
The requirements in the International Air Transport Association (IATA)
Live Animals Regulations (LAR), while used specifically for air
transport, are in most cases appropriate for non-air transport (road,
rail, and sea). The World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE)'s
proposed Web site for non-air animal and plant transport methods would
be useful as a supplement for alternative transport methods to those
described in the IATA-LAR, provided it addresses the challenges
presented with the transport of live captive and wild CITES-listed taxa
that require special attention for non-air transport methods (e.g.,
duration of transit time, environmental conditions, and conveyance
42. Physical inspection of timber shipments (Doc. 42; Germany, on
behalf of the European Community Member States). Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Support. Document CoP14 Doc. 42 details a number
of problems faced by CITES inspection officials at ports of import and
export in inspecting, identifying, and measuring the volume of CITES
timber shipments. Document CoP14 Doc. 42 recommends that CITES take
action to provide guidance to the Parties on enforcement of timber
listings and focuses on identification and the development of a
methodology for the physical inspection of timber shipments. The
document contains two draft decisions in the Annex. The first draft
decision would direct the Secretariat, in consultation with the Plants
Committee, CITES Parties, and relevant organizations, to identify
existing timber identification tools for CITES-listed species and
identify ways that these tools can be accessed by CITES inspection
authorities. This decision would further direct the Secretariat to
identify gaps for which additional work is needed to develop timber
identification tools; the Secretariat is then to report its findings to
the Standing Committee. The second draft decision would direct the
Standing Committee, in consultation with the Secretariat, range
countries, and other Parties and relevant organizations, to develop
guidelines for the enforcement of timber listings and to focus on the
development of a methodology to carry out physical inspections of
44. Identification Manual (Doc. 44). Tentative U.S. negotiating
position: Support. This document is a report from the Secretariat on
progress in the development of identification materials for listed
species. We are nearing completion of an identification sheet for
paddlefish (Polyodon spathula) and plan to submit the sheet to the
CITES Secretariat later this year. On December 16, 2005, we listed the
alligator snapping turtle (Macroclemys temminckii) and all species of
map turtles (Graptemys spp.) in Appendix III of CITES. We are currently
working with the University of Kansas to draft identification sheets
for those species. We will continue to address the remaining CITES-
listed species for which the United States is responsible for providing
Exemptions and Special Trade Provisions
45. Personal and household effects (Doc. 45). Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Support. This document contains a proposal from
the Standing Committee's Personal and Household Effects Working Group
to amend Resolution Conf. 13.7 (on control of trade in personal and
household effects) to facilitate trade in personally owned specimens of
certain CITES-listed species. The United States has been an active
participant in this working group since it was established in 2006. The
United States believes that the list of exempted items is a useful tool
in implementing the Convention. We also believe that, although
additions to the list may be appropriate in certain limited
circumstances, any substantial increase in the number of items included
in the list is likely to create confusion and enforcement problems. The
United States supports development of a careful and deliberative
process to amend the list.
46. Trade in some crocodilian specimens (Doc. 46; Germany, on
behalf of the European Community Member States). Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Oppose. The basic contention of the document is
that the implementation of Resolution Conf. 11.12 is working so well
that the issuance of re-export documents for finished crocodilian
leather products is an expensive, unnecessary redundancy. This proposal
is inconsistent with CITES Article I(b)(ii), which requires that
readily recognizable parts and derivatives of animal species listed in
Appendices I and II are considered specimens that are subject to the
provisions of the Convention. The proponents have not argued or
presented information to suggest that these specimens are not readily
recognizable. We are unconvinced that the issuance of re-export
documents for finished crocodilian leather products is unnecessarily
redundant. Furthermore, we believe that adoption of such a proposal
would establish a dangerous precedent that some Parties may wish to
apply to the finished products of other CITES-listed species.
47. Applications to register operations that breed Appendix-I
animal species in captivity for commercial purposes (Doc. 47).
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Oppose. This document refers to
Notification to the Parties Nos. 2004/054 and 2005/48, requests by the
Management Authority of the Philippines to register a captive-breeding
operation for the following birds: Amazona ochrocephala auropalliata,
Amazona ochrocephala oratrix, Amazona viridigenalis, Anodorhynchus
hyacinthinus, Ara militaris, Ara rubrogenys, Cacatua goffini, and
Propyrrhura maracana. We
are unable to support the approval of this operation for these eight
species because the applications did not provide sufficient
documentation on legal acquisition of the parental stock. Although
documentation was provided, it is not specific to the species involved
and refers only generically to parrots. Further, no documentation is
provided to show that the parental stock was legally exported from
range countries. Therefore, the captive-breeding operation does not
meet the bred-in-captivity criteria of Resolution Conf. 10.16 (Rev.),
specifically paragraph (b)(ii)A, which requires that the breeding stock
must have been established ``in accordance with CITES and relevant
national laws.'' Approval of this operation in the absence of
documentation of legal origin of its stock could potentially set a
precedent for approving other captive-breeding operations that
similarly lack such documentation.
48. Relationship between ex situ production and in situ
conservation: report of the Standing Committee (Doc. 48). Tentative
U.S. negotiating position: Document CoP14 Doc. 48 contains
recommendations of the Standing Committee's Clearing House. As a member
of the Clearing House, the United States provided technical comments on
the version of this document presented to the Standing Committee for
SC54. The United States agrees with the CITES Secretariat that the
issues raised by the relationship between ex situ production methods
and in situ conservation efforts (for CITES-listed species) are
interesting. However, we believe that the Parties must carefully
consider, in light of current budgetary constraints, whether the
recommended study represents a high-priority activity and will support
the core purposes and functions of CITES.
49. Reservations regarding species transferred from one Appendix to
another (Doc. 49). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. The
Convention provides three provisions under which a Party may take a
reservation: (1) Article XXIII provides for a new Party to take a
reservation with respect to a species listed in Appendix I, II, or III,
within 90 days after the date that the Party deposits its instrument of
ratification; (2) Article XV provides for a Party to take a reservation
to an adopted amendment to Appendix I or II, within 90 days after the
CoP at which the amendment was adopted; and (3) Article XVI provides
for a Party to take a reservation on a species listed in Appendix III,
or on any parts or derivatives of that species, at any time after the
listing of the species. With Document CoP14 Doc. 49, the Secretariat
presents a draft revision to Resolution Conf. 4.25 to clarify that, in
cases where a Party holds a reservation in relation to a species that
is subsequently transferred from one Appendix to another (or in other
words deleted from one Appendix and simultaneously added to another
Appendix), the reservation will be considered as no longer valid, and
the Party will need to enter a new reservation if it wishes to maintain
the reservation on the species. In the draft revision, the Secretariat
also proposes to combine the two existing recommendations in Resolution
Conf. 4.25 to shorten and simplify the text.
Species Trade and Conservation Issues
50. Great apes (Doc. 50). Tentative U.S. negotiating position:
Undecided until certain reports are made available to the CITES
Secretariat and reviewed. In Document CoP14 Doc. 50 the CITES
Secretariat reviews activities involving great apes.
At SC54, held in October 2006, the Secretariat expressed its
concern regarding a lack of information relating to orangutans that had
been illegally imported into Cambodia and questioned whether the
Convention was being adequately implemented. The Standing Committee
called upon Cambodia to facilitate a mission by the Secretariat to
assess implementation of the Convention, but to date the request has
not been answered. The Secretariat will report on this subject at CoP14
and also has expressed its concerns regarding illicit trade in great
apes by Egypt. The Standing Committee requested Egypt to prepare a
report for CoP14 on its enforcement of the Convention, particularly
with regard to the illicit trade in primates. The report has not yet
been prepared. The Standing Committee recommended that the Conference
of the Parties review the reports concerning Cambodia and Egypt and
decide whether additional measures, including non-compliance measures
or a verification mission by the Secretariat, are necessary.
The United States is unable to determine a definite position until
the reports requested by the Secretariat from Cambodia and Egypt
concerning reports on illegal trade in primates can be reviewed. The
United States takes non-compliance issues very seriously and will look
closely at the responses and reports requested from Cambodia and Egypt.
The United States has been supportive of past actions recommended by
the Secretariat in response to non-compliance issues, and unless there
are circumstances that would warrant otherwise, we expect to continue
our support of the Secretariat's recommendations.
51. Cetaceans (Doc. 51; Japan). Tentative U.S. negotiating
position: Oppose. This document contains two draft decisions that, if
adopted, would direct the Animals Committee to include in its Review of
the Appendices all cetaceans in Appendix I that are managed by the
International Whaling Commission (IWC). The second draft decision would
direct the CITES Secretariat to write to the IWC Secretariat conveying
the concern of the Conference of the Parties regarding the postponement
of the Revised Management Scheme discussions. The United States
believes it is doubtful that any new and compelling information would
be revealed by this review, since the whale species most highly traded
have been carefully reviewed by the IWC Scientific Committee and have
been under almost continuous scrutiny by the Parties since CoP9 in
52. Asian big cats (Doc. 52). Tentative U.S. negotiating position:
Support. In Document CoP14 Doc. 52, the Secretariat notes that several
countries have achieved success in halting the downward population
trend for wild tigers by using well-equipped and trained anti-poaching
units. However, the Secretariat contends that, despite all the
attention and money that have been put towards conserving tigers, wild
tiger populations are probably at greater risk of extinction today than
ever before. Unless the CoP can identify any new approach to the
conservation of Asian big cat species, the Secretariat sees little
option other than for the Parties to renew their efforts to eliminate
illicit trade in specimens of these species.
53.1 Trade in elephant specimens (Doc. 53.1). Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Undecided, pending the outcome of the African
elephant range States dialogue meeting and discussions at SC55. This
document was submitted by the Secretariat to report on a number of
items related to both domestic and international ivory trade.
Specifically, the document provides information on accomplishments
achieved under the Action Plan for the control of trade in African
elephant ivory, adopted at CoP13; the Secretariat's efforts to verify
if certain conditions have been met to allow international trade from
government-owned ivory stocks for certain countries, in line with the
annotation adopted at CoP12; a review of the implementation of ivory
trade controls in Zimbabwe; and a number of recent items related to
international trade in ivory. The Secretariat will report orally on
this subject at CoP14 and make specific recommendations at that time.
The United States will formulate its position based on the results of
the African elephant range States dialogue meeting and reports expected
at SC55 and CoP14.
53.2 Monitoring of illegal trade in ivory and other elephant
specimens (Doc. 53.2). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided.
At the time this notice was prepared, this document had not been posted
on the Secretariat's website.
53.3 Monitoring of illegal hunting in elephant range States (Doc.
53.3). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. This document
was prepared by the Secretariat to report on progress since CoP13 in
implementing the MIKE (Monitoring the Illegal Killing of Elephants)
program. At SC54, the Committee agreed that MIKE baseline information
was not yet complete (a condition required before the ivory sale agreed
at CoP12 may take place) and that the Secretariat should report on the
MIKE baseline at SC55. The Secretariat notes in Document CoP14 Doc.
53.3 that the completed baseline information is ready to be presented
at SC55. The document discusses MIKE activities since CoP13 and
describes the current status of funding for the African and Asian MIKE
programs. Although funding has been secured to support the MIKE program
in Africa through 2011, the Secretariat is seeking $4 million to
support MIKE activities in Asia for the period 2007-2011. The
Secretariat will report orally on this subject at CoP14, including
information on the outcomes of the baseline discussions at SC54 and
fund-raising efforts. The United States will formulate its position
based on the results of the African elephant range States dialogue
meeting and reports expected at SC55 and CoP14.
53.4 Illegal ivory trade and control of internal markets (Doc.
53.4; Kenya and Mali). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided.
This document submitted by Kenya and Mali is intended to support CoP14
Prop. 6. Document CoP14 Doc. 53.4 chronicles ivory seizures since CoP13
and provides information on domestic ivory markets around the world.
Kenya and Mali propose amendments to Resolution Conf. 10.10 (Rev.
CoP12), including a recommendation that Parties whose elephant
populations are listed in Appendix I not introduce proposals to
transfer those populations to Appendix II for a period of 20 years and
a 20-year moratorium on ivory trade from Appendix-II populations,
except for non-commercial trade in hunting trophies and the sale
approved at CoP12. The document also includes a draft decision urging
ivory-importing countries and others to provide financial and technical
support for implementation of the Action Plan for the control of trade
in African elephant ivory. We appreciate the position of Kenya and Mali
relative to conservation efforts for African elephants. However, we
note that a 20-year ban on listing proposals may be contrary to Article
XV of the Treaty, which provides for any Party to propose an amendment
to Appendix I or II at any CoP. The United States will formulate its
final position based on the results of the African elephant range
States dialogue meeting and reports expected at SC55 and CoP14.
54. Rhinoceroses (Doc. 54). Tentative U.S. negotiating position:
Support in principle, but financial decisions are still undecided. In
Document CoP14 Doc. 54, the Secretariat reports on the outcome of the
projects undertaken by IUCN and TRAFFIC related to the conservation of
and trade in African and Asian rhinoceroses. The Secretariat proposes
to incorporate the reporting role of the IUCN/SSC African and Asian
Rhino Specialist Groups and TRAFFIC into Resolution Conf. 9.14 (Rev.
CoP13). The Secretariat also proposes two draft decisions related to
the continued illegal trade in rhinoceros horns and one draft decision
related to site-based monitoring of rhinoceros populations. The
Secretariat notes that there are substantial financial implications
associated with adopting its recommendations on this issue. The United
States applauds the work undertaken by IUCN and TRAFFIC and supports
continued work in combating the illegal hunting and trade in
rhinoceroses. However, with regard to the financial implications of
adopting the recommendations in the document, we believe that any items
related to budgeting and financing activities under CITES must be
carefully considered by the Parties in light of other priorities.
55. Tibetan antelope (Doc. 55). Tentative U.S. negotiating
position: Support. Resolution Conf. 11.8 (Rev. CoP13) instructed the
Standing Committee to undertake a regular review of the enforcement
measures taken by the Parties to eliminate illicit trade in Tibetan
antelope products on the basis of the CITES Secretariat's report, and
to report the results at each meeting of the Conference of the Parties.
This document submitted by Secretariat summarizes the report.
56. Saiga antelope (Doc. 56). Tentative U.S. negotiating position:
Support, with additions. This document refers to Decisions 13.27
through 13.35 on saiga antelope, which were to be implemented prior to
CoP14. These interconnected decisions were directed to the range States
of the saiga antelope (Kazakhstan, Mongolia, the Russian Federation,
Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, and possibly China), other Parties
(specifically those that are important consumers of and traders in
saiga products, and those that could act as financial donors) and
bodies, the Standing Committee, and the CITES Secretariat to address
serious concerns over the continuously deteriorating conservation
status of the saiga antelope. This document reports on the progress in
accomplishing these decisions over the past 3 years, and recommends
additional draft decisions to the Parties to ensure the continued
conservation of saiga antelope. The saiga antelope was listed in
Appendix II in 1995. The most significant threat to the species is
illegal hunting, primarily for the Asian traditional medicine trade. In
the document, the Secretariat notes that anti-poaching efforts have
intensified in some parts of the saiga's range, and should be extended
to its entire range. We wish to underscore the significance of this
statement, because poaching continues to impact conservation efforts to
restore the saiga population, which decreased from one million to
30,000 animals in the 1990s. According to the Secretariat's document,
the Russian Federation is the only range country that has not signed
the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for the Conservation, Restoration
and Sustainable Use of the Saiga Antelope (Saiga tatarica tatarica).
The MoU contains a Saiga Action Plan that calls for measures to restore
the habitat and populations of the saiga antelope, and enhance
transboundary and international cooperation through, inter alia, a
regional conservation and management strategy. Therefore, the
Secretariat recommends that the Russian Federation sign the MoU as soon
as possible. The United States has provided financial support for the
conservation and protection of the saiga antelope in the wild and for
the range States workshop on this species in May 2002 in Kalmykia. We
support the Secretariat's recommendations and plan to suggest the
inclusion of saiga antelope on the agenda of the Standing Committee
meetings between CoP14 and CoP15.
57. Tortoises and freshwater turtles (Doc. 57). Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Undecided. The United States has been involved in
listing proposals and policy advice on the trade in tortoises and
turtles for a number of years. While we generally do not have an
objection to the amendments suggested by the Secretariat--provided they
are endorsed by consensus by the Asian range and trading States--we are
concerned that the CITES Parties have not paid sufficient attention to
these trade problems after listing a number of Asian turtle species in
Appendix II at CoPs 12 and 13. Due to the continuing and evolving trade
in these species in Asia, including farming practices that may
negatively impact wild populations, the United States believes that
additional study and discussion of these problems is needed, and we
plan to introduce this point at CoP14.
58. Hawksbill turtle (Doc. 58). Tentative U.S. negotiating
position: Support. We agree with the Secretariat that no further action
is needed. No funding was found for the convening of a workshop to
develop a collaborative regional strategy for the conservation of
hawksbill sea turtles, perhaps because it is regulation of
international trade and not management that is the main responsibility
of CITES. However, the Inter-American Convention for the Protection and
Conservation of Sea Turtles, at its last meeting passed a resolution
calling for a workshop to evaluate the current status of hawksbill sea
turtle populations in the Wider Caribbean and Western Atlantic, and to
present the best available methods of research and conservation for the
species. The United States will announce its support for the IAC
workshop and recommend that CITES collaborate with this and other
relevant bodies concerning this species such as the Caribbean
59.1 Report of the Animals Committee (Doc. 59.1). Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Support with exception. The report contains: (1)
A review of implementation issues related to sharks listed in the CITES
Appendices, to provide assistance to Parties in managing the species
covered by the Convention; (2) information on specific cases where
trade is having an adverse impact on sharks and the key species of
sharks affected in this way; and (3) a listing and analysis of those
species that are specifically threatened by trade. The proposal
contains a large number of wide-ranging decisions and recommendations.
As indicated by the Secretariat, at CoP14 a working group will review
and edit the draft decisions; prioritize and rationalize the proposed
measures; minimize overlapping instructions; look into reducing and
simplifying the reporting burden; and assess the cost of implementing
the draft decisions. The United States will work to ensure that this
work is completed.
59.2 Additional conservation measures (Doc. 59.2; Australia).
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. This document states
that, while the report from the Animals Committee to this meeting of
the Conference of the Parties contains a number of useful suggestions
for consideration to protect and conserve sharks, additional measures
should be considered under the agenda item addressing sharks. These
measures include: (1) That countries with National Plans of Action
(NPOA-Sharks) strongly encourage the remaining shark-fishing countries
to develop and implement NPOA-Sharks; (2) that regional fishing
management organizations implement regional plans of action; and (3)
that Parties greatly improve their data collection and reporting. The
United States is one of the 16 countries that have implemented a NPOA-
Sharks and is a lead country for promoting the sustainable use of shark
59.3 Trade measures regarding the porbeagle Lamna nasus and the
spiny dogfish Squalus acanthias (Doc. 59.3; Germany, on behalf of the
European Community Member States). Tentative U.S. negotiating position:
Undecided. This document will be considered if proposals for listing
porbeagle and spiny dogfish in Appendix II are adopted. The document
contains a draft decision that, if adopted, would direct the Animals
Committee, in consultation with the FAO and other relevant experts, to
examine trade in porbeagles and spiny dogfish and report at the 16th
meeting of the Conference of the Parties. The Secretariat believes
Resolution Conf. 12.6 on Conservation and Management of Sharks already
directs the Animals Committee to make species-specific recommendations
to the Conference of the Parties, if necessary, on improving the
conservation status of sharks and the regulation of international trade
in these species. FAO has been present at each of the recent meetings
of the Animals Committee and has assisted the Committee in discussions
on marine fish species, including sharks.
60. Sturgeons and Paddlefish
60.1 Report of the Secretariat (Doc. 60.1). Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: No position is necessary; the CoP is asked to
note the report. This document was prepared by the Secretariat to
report on progress made in developing a trade database for sturgeon
specimens subject to annual quotas (Decisions 13.44-13.47) and other
activities related to sturgeon conservation.
60.2 Amendment of Resolution Conf. 12.7 (Rev. CoP13)
60.2.1 Proposal of the Standing Committee's Working Group on
Sturgeons (Doc. 60.2.1; Islamic Republic of Iran). Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Support some provisions; oppose others. Two
documents (CoP14 Doc. 60.2.1 and CoP14 Doc. 60.2.2) contain proposed
amendments to the resolution on conservation and trade of sturgeons and
paddlefish (Resolution Conf. 12.7 (Rev. CoP13)) and should be
considered together. Document CoP14 Doc. 60.2.1 was submitted by the
Islamic Republic of Iran, on behalf of the Standing Committee's working
group on sturgeons, and Document CoP14 Doc. 60.2.2 was submitted by the
Russian Federation. We fully support some of the changes proposed,
including a reduction of the personal effects exemption for caviar from
250g to 125g, but we have serious concerns about others, including the
proposed extension of the timeframe established at CoP13 for export of
caviar from shared stocks. The United States has participated in past
working groups on this issue, including the group established at SC54.
Document CoP14 Doc. 60.2.1 includes text that was not agreed to by the
working group and will require further discussion at the CoP. We expect
that a working group will be established at CoP14, and we plan to
continue to participate fully on this important issue. We will develop
a final position based on the outcome of discussions at CoP14.
60.2.2 Proposal of the Russian Federation (Doc. 60.2.2). Tentative
U.S. negotiating position: See discussion on Document CoP14 Doc. 60.2.1
61. Toothfish: report of CCAMLR (Doc. 61). Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Support. At CoP12, the Parties adopted Resolution
Conf. 12.4, Cooperation between CITES and the Commission for the
Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) regarding
trade in toothfish, that encouraged CCAMLR to ``maintain a permanent
flow of information'' to CITES through the Conference of the Parties.
Document CoP14 Doc. 61 is CCAMLR's report to the CoP and contains four
recommendations for the Conference of the Parties to: (1) request four
particular CITES Parties that are either involved in illegal,
unregulated, and unreported (IUU) fishing for toothfish or engaged in
toothfish trade without having fully implemented CCAMLR conservation
measures to report their position regarding
implementing Resolution Conf. 12.4 for consideration at the next CCAMLR
annual meeting; (2) notify CITES Parties whose fishing vessels are
engaged in IUU fishing for toothfish that their actions seriously
undermine the objectives of CCAMLR; and (3) reinforce the provision of
Resolution Conf. 12.4 that recommends that CITES Parties that capture
or trade in toothfish adhere to CCAMLR if they have not already done so
and, in any case, cooperate voluntarily with its conservation measures,
particularly the catch documentation scheme (CDS).
The United States recognizes the threat that IUU fishing poses to
toothfish populations and fully supports adoption of CCAMLR
conservation measures by all countries involved in the toothfish trade.
We renew our full endorsement and strong support of the fundamental
principles and language adopted in Resolution Conf. 12.4 in 2002.
62. Sea cucumbers (Doc. 62). Tentative U.S. negotiating position:
Support. This document fulfills the decision of the last CoP, that the
Animals Committee should prepare, for consideration at the 14th meeting
of the Conference of the Parties, a discussion paper on the biological
and trade status of sea cucumbers to provide scientific guidance on the
actions needed to secure their conservation status. The United States
has actively participated in this process and will continue to do so.
63. Trade in traditional medicines (Doc. 63; Australia). Tentative
U.S. negotiating position: Support. In its document, Australia
recommends a number of revisions to Resolution Conf. 10.19 (Rev. CoP12)
(Traditional medicines), primarily aimed at encouraging Parties to
pursue the development and use of alternative ingredients in
traditional medicines as a preferred alternative to breeding Appendix-I
species in captivity for commercial purposes. The United States shares
Australia's concerns regarding the potential for creating or increasing
demand for wild Appendix-I species by using captive-bred specimens in
64. Bigleaf mahogany: Report of the Working Group (Doc. 64).
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. In Document CoP14 Doc.
64, prepared by the Chairman of the Plants Committee with the
assistance of the Chairman of the Bigleaf Mahogany Working Group
(BMWG), the Plants Committee recommends adoption of a number of new
draft decisions related to the continuation of the BMWG under the
Plants Committee and the interpretation of the annotations for tree
species listed in the Appendices. Additionally, the Plants Committee
recommends a draft decision directed to the Plants Committee that it
review at its 17th meeting (anticipated to be held in April 2008) range
State reports on implementation of the CITES listing for bigleaf
mahogany and consider whether there is a need to include the species in
the Review of Significant Trade. The United States supports the
continuation of the BMWG under the Plants Committee, but believes that,
if by the 17th meeting of the Plants Committee (PC17), sufficient
progress has not been made in improving the regulation of trade, the
species should be included in the Review of Significant Trade as a
matter of urgency.
65. Report of the Central Africa Bushmeat Working Group (Doc. 65).
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. Document CoP14 Doc. 65
presents the Coordinator's report of the Central Africa Bushmeat
Working Group in fulfillment of Decision 13.102 on progress in
implementing national action plans relating to the trade in bushmeat
and other initiatives regarding this issue. The United States has
supported the work of the Working Group since its inception and
applauds the progress the group has made in supporting the development
of national strategies and action plans to combat international
commercial bushmeat trade.
Amendment of the Appendices
66. Periodic review of the Appendices (Doc. 66). Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Support. The Review of the Appendices is an
activity conducted by the Animals and Plants Committees to ensure that
the CITES Appendices continue to accurately reflect the biological and
trade status of species included in the Appendices. This document
recounts efforts by the Animals and Plants Committees, with the
involvement of the Standing Committee, to establish an objective and
efficient process for selecting species for review. Although the two
technical committees, through a working group, developed a ``rapid
assessment'' technique for selecting species for review, this procedure
was subsequently determined to not be practicable for selecting a
workable list of species for review. The Animals and Plants Committees
have suggested that further work is needed to develop a process for
selecting species for review, and are proposing that the work done thus
far should be used as a starting point for further refining and
finalizing these efforts.
68. Proposals to Amend Appendices I and II (Doc. 68)
Prop. 1. Transfer of Nycticebus spp. from Appendix II to Appendix
I. Proposed by Cambodia. Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support.
Slow lorises (Nycticebus spp.) are prosimians, an ancient group of
primates. The genus is widely distributed in at least 14 South and
Southeast Asian countries. Large-scale deforestation has reduced the
habitat for Nycticebus species, and thus it can be inferred that the
genus has undergone a reduction in overall population numbers. In
September 2006, the IUCN/SSC Primate Specialist Group revised its
classification of Nycticebus species based on the IUCN Red List
criteria and recommended that all species now be considered Vulnerable
or Endangered. Recent scientific studies have also revealed that the
genus Nycticebus contains more species than previously thought, and
consequently, the individual species may consist of smaller
populations. All species of Nycticebus have a low reproductive rate,
making them particularly vulnerable to exploitation. Therefore, it
seems that the biological criteria are met for listing in Appendix I
according to Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP13). The proposal also
demonstrates that international trade in species of Nycticebus has
been, and still is taking place, primarily for medicinal purposes and
for use as pets. Although official figures for legal trade are
relatively low, much of the trade is illegal, as evidenced by the
number of seizures taking place, indicating that the real trade volume
is likely to be much higher.
Prop. 3. Transfer the Ugandan population of leopard (Panthera
pardus) from Appendix I to Appendix II with an annotation that trade is
to be allowed for the exclusive purpose of sport hunting for trophies
and skins for personal use, to be exported as personal effects; and
with an annual export quota of 50 leopards for the whole country.
Proposed by Uganda. Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Oppose
transfer to Appendix II; oppose the proposed export quota of 50
leopards per year. The proposal cites both Resolution Conf. 10.14 (Rev.
CoP13) and Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP13) for the approval of an
annual export quota of 50 leopards. The proposal is not written in
accordance with the format for proposals to amend the Appendices as per
Annex 6 to Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP13). As a result, it does not
demonstrate that the population in Uganda no longer meets the
biological criteria for inclusion in Appendix I or which precautionary
measure will be in
place. The CITES Secretariat has suggested that Uganda request
consideration of this proposal under agenda item 37 (Appendix-I species
subject to export quotas) rather than item 68 (Proposals to amend the
Uganda asserts that the proposed export quota of 50 leopards per
year is a precautionary figure that will account for both animal
control and sport hunting. The United States, as reflected in the
document we submitted for CoP12 on establishing scientifically based
quotas and in accordance with Resolution Conf. 9.21 (Rev. CoP13), which
calls for establishment of a scientific basis for proposed quotas, is
keen to ensure that annual export quotas are established on strong
biological data. Although a quota of 50 is considered by Uganda as
precautionary, the proposal does not provide any supporting biological
information for this figure. Therefore, it cannot be determined whether
the population can be sustained under the proposed quota figure.
Prop. 4. Maintenance of the African elephant (Loxodonta africana)
populations of Botswana, Namibia, South Africa, and Zimbabwe in
Appendix II in terms of Article II, paragraph 2(b), with the
replacement of all existing annotations with annotations on trade,
export quotas, and proceeds regarding raw ivory. Proposed by Botswana
and Namibia. Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. The
proposal would maintain the populations of Botswana, Namibia, South
Africa, and Zimbabwe in Appendix II with changes to the annotations.
The annotations would be replaced to allow the establishment of annual
export quotas for trade in raw ivory. The ivory would be sold to
trading partners that have been certified by the Secretariat, in
consultation with the Standing Committee, and the income from the trade
in raw ivory would be used exclusively for elephant conservation and
community development programs. The United States will formulate its
position based on the results of the African elephant range states
dialogue meeting and reports expected at SC55 and CoP14.
Prop. 5. Amendment of the annotation of the African elephant
(Loxodonta africana) populations of Botswana. Proposed by Botswana.
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. This proposal would
amend the annotation for Botswana's elephant population from the live
animal trade condition ``for in situ conservation programs'' only to
``for commercial purposes.'' ``Trade in leather goods'' would be
changed from ``non-commercial'' to ``commercial'' purposes (as is the
case for Namibia and South Africa). Trade in registered raw ivory could
only come from registered government-owned stocks originating in
Botswana and subject to the conditions of Resolution Conf. 10.10 (Rev.
CoP12) concerning domestic manufacturing and trade. A maximum of 40
metric tons of ivory could be traded and exported in a single shipment
under strict supervision of the Secretariat. The income of the trade
would be used exclusively for elephant conservation and community
conservation and development programs within or adjacent to the
elephant range. The proposed annotation would allow an immediate ``one-
off'' sale and annual sales of up to 8 metric tons of registered stocks
of raw ivory for commercial purposes. The United States will formulate
its position based on the results of the African elephant range states
dialogue meeting and reports expected at SC55 and CoP14.
Prop. 6. Amendment of the annotation of the African elephant
(Loxodonta africana) populations of Botswana, Namibia, and South
Africa. Proposed by Kenya and Mali. Tentative U.S. negotiating
position: Undecided. This proposal would amend the annotations of the
populations of Botswana, Namibia, and South Africa to prohibit trade in
raw or worked ivory for 20 years, except for hunting trophies for non-
commercial purposes, the one-off sale agreed upon at CoP12, and
Namibian ekipas (ivory trinkets) for non-commercial purposes. It also
revokes Zimbabwe's annotation to sell ivory carvings for non-commercial
purposes. The United States will formulate its position based on the
results of the African Elephant Range State Dialogue meeting and
reports expected at SC55 and CoP14.
Prop. 8. Amendment of the annotation of the vicu[ntilde]a (Vicugna
vicugna) population of Bolivia for the exclusive purpose of allowing
international trade in wool sheared from live vicu[ntilde]as, and in
cloth and items made thereof, including luxury handicrafts and knitted
articles. Proposed by Bolivia. Tentative U.S. negotiating position:
Undecided. In February 2003, Bolivia listed its vicu[ntilde]a
population in Appendix II for wool and products derived from sheared
live animals of the populations of the Conservation Units of Mauri-
Desaguadero, Ulla Ulla, and L[iacute]pez-Chichas; and wool products
made from sheared live animals of the rest of the population of
Bolivia. This proposal would amend the annotation to include the entire
Bolivian vicuna population for wool and products. The rest of the
annotation remains unchanged. Although the wild population is
increasing, we would like an explanation for the decrease in the
population of L[iacute]pez-Chichas of over 2,000 specimens between 2002
Prop. 9. Inclusion of Barbary red deer (Cervus elaphus barbarus) in
Appendix I. Proposed by Algeria. Tentative U.S. negotiating position:
Oppose. The Barbary red deer is considered a subspecies of red deer
(Cervus elaphus) and is confined to Tunisia, Algeria, and a
reintroduced population in Morocco. However, recent genetic analysis
has indicated that these populations in North Africa are virtually
indistinguishable from C. elaphus corsicanus in Sardinia, Italy, and
the reintroduced population in Corsica, France. One assessment
considers all these populations to belong to a separate species, Cervus
corsicanus. The Barbary red deer has been included in Appendix III at
the request of Tunisia since 1976. The subspecies was assessed as
``Lower risk/near threatened'' by IUCN in 1996. The wild population is
reported to have decreased historically, and appears to have a
restricted area of distribution. However, it is unclear if the
biological criteria are met due to the uncertainty of its taxonomy.
According to the proposal, there is no national utilization, no legal
or illegal trade, and no actual or potential trade impacts. Therefore,
the trade criteria for an Appendix-I listing are not met. Threats are
reported to include poaching and forest fires; listing in Appendix I is
not likely to benefit the conservation of this species.
Prop. 10. Inclusion of Cuvier's gazelle (Gazella cuvieri) in
Appendix I. Proposed by Algeria. Tentative U.S. negotiating position:
Oppose. The Cuvier's gazelle is distributed in Algeria, Morocco, and
Tunisia in small scattered populations. The species has been included
in Appendix III at the request of Tunisia since 1976. The species was
assessed by IUCN as ``Endangered'' in 1996, on the basis that the
population numbered below 2,500 mature individuals and was declining.
In 2005-2006, the Algerian population was estimated at 500 individuals,
and populations were reported to be stable. According to the proposal,
there is no national utilization, no legal or illegal trade, and no
actual or potential trade impacts. Therefore, the trade criteria for an
Appendix-I listing are not met. Threats are reported to include
poaching and forest fires; listing in Appendix I is not likely to
benefit the conservation of this species.
Prop. 11. Inclusion of Dorcas gazelle (Gazella dorcas) in Appendix
I. Proposed by Algeria. Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Oppose.
The Dorcas gazelle has a patchy distribution in at least 19 countries
in the arid and sub-arid zones of the Sahelo-Saharan region and in the
Near East. The species has been included in Appendix III of CITES at
the request of Tunisia since 1976. According to the proposal, the
species' population in the wild has declined significantly, perhaps by
50% within the past half-century, due to hunting with motorized
vehicles and, to a lesser extent, degradation and disappearance of
habitat. The species was assessed as ``Vulnerable'' by IUCN in 2000,
and is included in Appendix I of the Convention on Migratory Species
(CMS). The species does not appear to meet the biological criteria for
inclusion in Appendix I, because there is no indication that the
species' range is restricted in extent or that the overall population
is small. The proposal does not provide any information on trade, and
although the CITES trade database shows very low levels of
international trade, it is mainly in live specimens, and to a lesser
extent body parts and trophies. Therefore, the trade criteria for an
Appendix-I listing are not met. Threats are reported to include
poaching and overgrazing by cattle. Listing in Appendix I is not likely
to benefit the conservation of this species.
Prop. 12. Inclusion of slender-horned gazelle (Gazella leptoceros)
in Appendix I. Proposed by Algeria. Tentative U.S. negotiating
position: Support. The slender-horned gazelle is distributed across
eight or nine countries in northern Africa. The species has been
included in Appendix III of CITES at the request of Tunisia since 1976.
The species was assessed as ``Endangered'' by IUCN in 1996 and appears
to meet the biological criteria for an Appendix-I listing. According to
the proposal, threats to the species include motorized hunting and
degradation of vegetation. International trade in trophies does occur,
but is not well documented. From a precautionary standpoint this
species merits inclusion in Appendix I.
Prop. 13. Transfer of the Brazilian population of black caiman
(Melanosuchus niger) from Appendix I to Appendix II. Proposed by
Brazil. Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. Brazil
submitted this proposal to transfer its population from Appendix I to
Appendix II. The population in Brazil comprises approximately 80% of
the species' range, is estimated to comprise 16 million individuals,
and is increasing. Brazil proposes to harvest 695 specimens per year in
the Mamirau? Sustainable Development Reserve. In subsequent years, a
harvest quota of 5-7% of the non-hatchling wild population (primarily
juvenile males) would be in place throughout Brazil. We have some
concerns about the adequacy of safeguards against illegal harvest,
uncontrolled exports from Brazil, and possible effects on the species
in adjacent range countries. We would also like to hear the opinions of
the other range States (Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Peru, and
Suriname). We note that this species is currently listed as endangered
under the Endangered Species Act, and as such, even if the proposal is
adopted, the import of specimens into the United States for commercial
purposes would remain prohibited.
Prop. 14. Transfer Guatemalan beaded lizard (Heloderma horridum
charlesbogerti) from Appendix II to Appendix I. Proposed by Guatemala.
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. The Guatemalan beaded
lizard is one of four subspecies of beaded lizard, a large venomous
species native to Mexico and Guatemala. The Guatemalan beaded lizard is
endemic to the Motagua Valley in eastern Guatemala and is considered to
be one of the most endangered animals in the world. This subspecies was
formally described in 1988, a decade later thought to be extinct in the
wild, and then re-discovered in 2002. There are an estimated 170-250
individuals of this subspecies; it is believed to have declined based
on the difficulty of locating individuals compared to the 1980s. The
major threats to the Guatemalan beaded lizard are habitat destruction,
over-collection for local and foreign use, persecution by locals, and
effects of hurricanes. Collection and trade in this subspecies are
illegal in Guatemala. However, illegal domestic and international trade
occur due to the high demand for the subspecies by collectors. Even a
small level of trade in this subspecies is significant due to its
extremely low population numbers.
Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP13) states that split-listing a
species should generally be avoided due to the potential enforcement
problems it creates, and it states that taxonomic listings below the
species level should be avoided unless the taxon in question is highly
distinctive and the use of the name would not give rise to enforcement
problems. Consultations with experts have revealed that specimens of
this subspecies from one year of age to adulthood can be distinguished
from other subspecies. Potential identification difficulties of very
young animals should not be an issue of concern because only adult
specimens have been found in the wild. This subspecies meets the
biological and trade criteria for an Appendix-I listing, and prevention
of any level of trade in wild specimens of this critically endangered
subspecies would contribute significantly to its conservation.
Prop. 15. Inclusion of porbeagle (Lamna nasus) in Appendix II with
entry into effect of the inclusion to be delayed by 18 months to enable
Parties to resolve the related technical and administrative issues.
Proposed by Germany, on behalf of the European Community Member States.
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. The proponent has cited
that the species' life history, vulnerability to overexploitation,
inadequate fisheries management, and overfishing as supporting reasons
for the proposal. There is not sufficient data in the proposal to
support the statement that international trade is one of the driving
factors in this species' overfished status or a factor that could
prohibit populations from rebounding. Both the United States and Canada
are actively managing the species to reduce fishing pressure. It is
also not clear whether it is possible (efficient and enforceable) to
distinguish porbeagle sharks from other species of sharks in trade. The
Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and the National Marine Fisheries
Service (NMFS) are studying the proposal and consulting with other
Parties to develop the U.S. position.
Prop. 16. Inclusion of spiny dogfish (Squalus acanthias) in
Appendix II with entry into effect of the inclusion to be delayed by 18
months to enable Parties to resolve the related technical and
administrative issues. Proposed by Germany, on behalf of the European
Community Member States. Tentative U.S. negotiating position:
Undecided. The proponent has cited that the species' life history,
vulnerability to overexploitation, inadequate fisheries management, and
overfishing as supporting reasons for the proposal. The proposal calls
for the listing of the species throughout its range. The Northeast
Atlantic stock has suffered a large decline, but a number of other
global stocks are currently stable. There are currently both Federal
and interstate fishery management plans for spiny dogfish in the United
States. The proponent also indicates that population declines in
several Northern Hemisphere stocks, combined with high market demand,
are driving fishing pressure on other stocks that are now beginning to
markets. The proposal contains little information to support this
observation. The Service and NMFS are studying the proposal and
consulting with other Parties to develop the U.S. position.
Prop. 18. Inclusion of European eel (Anguilla anguilla) in Appendix
II. Proposed by Germany, on behalf of the European Community Member
States. Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. The European
eel occurs in coastal areas and freshwater ecosystems in Europe,
northern Africa, and the Mediterranean parts of Asia. The proponent has
cited that the species' complex life history in combination with heavy
exploitation in all of its life stages and high fishing mortality,
along with habitat loss, pollution, climate change affecting ocean
currents, and damming of rivers, as factors that have resulted in sharp
population declines. Poaching and illegal trade in European eels is
also a concern. However, because the fishery is small in scale and
specialized, bycatch of the species is not considered a threat to the
species. Although there are various regional management measures in
place, there is no regulatory protection mechanism in place to regulate
international trade in the European eel. Due to historical and recent
declines, as measured from harvest data (e.g., an average 95-99%
decline in harvest in 19 rivers in 12 countries), the species appears
to meet the criteria in Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP13) for
inclusion in Appendix II. However, the similarity of appearance between
this species and other eels in the genus Anguilla, including the
American eel (A. rostrata), which is also in international trade,
presents implementation and enforcement difficulties for such a
Prop. 20. Inclusion of Brazilian populations of spiny lobster
(Panulirus argus and P. laevicauda) in Appendix II. Proposed by Brazil.
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Oppose. The proponent states that
the status of these species in Brazilian waters is severely overfished
and that overfishing is still occurring mainly due to take of
undersized animals. The United States feels strongly that, as the
world's largest importer of Brazil's spiny lobsters, we should make
every effort to support Brazil for its efforts to conserve and manage
spiny lobster in their waters. However, this proposal is not
supportable because it would result in a split-listing of the species
that would not be enforceable. Enforcement authorities in importing
countries would not be able to determine whether spiny lobsters
entering their countries were coming from Brazil, and thus required to
be accompanied by CITES export permits, or whether they had originated
elsewhere. Inclusion of these species in Appendix III throughout their
ranges would provide greater conservation benefit and would track the
species throughout the Wider Caribbean. The Service and NMFS are
consulting bilaterally with the Government of Brazil and multilaterally
with other governments in the region to consider additional tools for
the conservation of spiny lobster populations.
Prop. 24. Deletion of leaf-bearing cacti in the genera Pereskia and
Quiabentia from Appendix II. Proposed by Argentina. Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Undecided. This proposal would remove all species
of these leaf-bearing cacti from Appendix II. For some of these
species, whose status in the wild is unclear, we are concerned about
the impact that unregulated trade may have on these species.
Prop. 25. Deletion of leaf-bearing cacti in the genus Pereskiopsis
from Appendix II. Proposed by Mexico. Tentative U.S. negotiating
position: Support. This proposal would remove Pereskiopsis spp. from
Appendix II. We have evaluated this proposal and discussed it directly
with the Mexican CITES authorities, and have determined that the
removal of this genus from Appendix II should not result in the
unsustainable use of these species for trade or enforcement
difficulties for regulating trade in other species due to similarity of
Prop. 26. Merging and amendment of annotations 1,
4 and 8 for cacti (Cactaceae spp. (4)) and
orchids (Orchidaceae spp. (8)) in Appendix II, and all taxa
annotated with annotation 1. Proposed by Switzerland.
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Oppose. This proposal was produced
outside the process that was established by the Plants Committee, at
the direction of the Parties, to streamline the annotations for CITES-
listed medicinal plants. The proposed language broadens the exemptions
as well as the taxa exempted, while providing little information on the
impact of unregulated trade on the species. In particular, we note that
inclusion of provisions to exempt leaves did not receive support from
the Plants Committee when discussed at its 15th meeting (PC15), and the
proposed provision to exempt herbarium specimens has been previously
rejected by the Parties as not being consistent with the terms of the
Prop. 27. Amendment of the annotations to Adonis vernalis, Guaiacum
species, Hydrastis canadensis, Nardostachys grandiflora, Panax ginseng,
Panax quinquefolius, Picrorhiza kurrooa, Podophyllum hexandrum,
Pterocarpus santalinus, Rauvolfia serpentina, Taxus chinensis, T.
fuana, T. cuspidata, T. sumatrana, and T. wallichiana, Orchidaceae
species in Appendix II, and all Appendix-II and -III taxa annotated
with annotation 1. Proposed by Switzerland as the Depositary
Government, at the request of the Plants Committee. Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Support. This document was produced by consensus
of the Medicinal Plant Annotations Working Group (MPAWG) in
consultation with the Plants Committee, under the direction of the
Conference of the Parties, to assess the effectiveness of and
streamline the annotations for CITES-listed medicinal plants (CoP13:
Decisions 13.50-13.52). The proposal clarifies terms and tracks
currently exempted material believed to be in trade, without expanding
upon the exemptions for species.
Prop. 29. Amendment of the annotation to Euphorbia species.
Proposed by Switzerland. Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Oppose.
As currently written, the annotation is difficult to understand and may
provide the opportunity to exclude wild-collected specimens from CITES
Prop. 30. Inclusion of pernambuco (Caesalpinia echinata) in
Appendix II, including all parts and derivatives. Proposed by Brazil.
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support on the condition that the
proposal will be amended at the CoP to exempt a limited quantity of
manufactured musical bows for personal use (e.g., by professional
musicians), or something similar. Pernambuco is the primary wood used
to make fine bows for stringed musical instruments, for which there is
no other comparable wood substitute.
Pernambuco is a slow-growing tropical tree restricted to the
Atlantic Coastal Forest of Brazil. Since 1992, the species has been
listed as threatened in Brazil, and is categorized as endangered by the
IUCN. Although Brazil has strict national controls in place that
regulate the use of this species, the species and its Atlantic Forest
habitat remain poorly protected, and enforcement of environmental laws
is constrained by the availability of financial and human resources.
Conservationists, and bow makers and musicians worldwide are concerned
about the conservation and sustainable use of existing stocks of
pernambuco. Several entities (e.g., the International Pernambuco
Conservation Initiative) are actively working in Brazil
to promote conservation and reforestation of pernambuco.
The listing of pernambuco in Appendix II would support the efforts
undertaken by the Brazilian Government to ensure that trade is both
legal and sustainable by requiring specimens in trade to have CITES
permits. However, given the number of existing bows worldwide, a
listing of the species that includes all parts and derivatives may be
overly burdensome on traveling musicians without providing substantial
conservation benefit. We will work with Brazil and other Parties on
this proposal to promote the conservation of this species while
avoiding unnecessary constraints on products already in trade.
Prop. 31. Inclusion of rosewood or cocobola (Dalbergia retusa) in
Appendix II, and D. granadillo for look-alike reasons. Proposed by
Germany, on behalf of the European Community Member States. Tentative
U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. Dalbergia retusa is a slow-
growing tree of tropical dry forests from Mexico to Panama; D.
granadillo occurs in El Salvador and Mexico. Dalbergia retusa has been
extensively harvested, and some areas are reported to be commercially
exhausted. The United States imports rosewood, which is used primarily
for the production of musical instruments. We are evaluating this
proposal to determine if it meets the requirements for inclusion in
Appendix II. The positions of range countries on this proposal are
critical to the development of our position, and therefore, we are
currently consulting with them on this proposal to determine how we can
best work cooperatively for the conservation and sustainable use of
Prop. 32. Inclusion of Honduras rosewood (Dalbergia stevensonii) in
Appendix II. Proposed by Germany, on behalf of the European Community
Member States. Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. Honduran
rosewood is restricted to swamp forests of southern Belize, northern
Guatemala, and southeastern Mexico. The United States imports rosewood,
which is used primarily for the production of musical instruments. We
are evaluating this proposal to determine if it meets the requirements
for inclusion in Appendix II. The positions of range countries on this
proposal are critical to the development of our position, and
therefore, we are currently consulting with them on this proposal to
determine how we can best work cooperatively for the conservation and
sustainable use of this species.
Prop. 33. Inclusion of the genus Cedrela in Appendix II. Proposed
by Germany, on behalf of the European Community Member States.
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. The proposal would
include Spanish cedar (C. odorata), and all other species in the genus
Cedrela (an estimated six species) for look-alike reasons, in Appendix
II. Spanish cedar is a wide-ranging species of lowland forests in the
Caribbean Islands, Central America, Mexico, and South America. In 2001,
Colombia and Peru included their populations of Spanish cedar in
Appendix III, with annotation 5, which designates logs, sawn
wood and veneer sheets. Since this listing, exports of Spanish cedar
from Peru to the United States have increased. We are consulting with
the range countries to clarify the support for, and the anticipated
effects of, this proposal. We will work with range countries and other
Parties on this proposal to promote sustainable forest management and
conservation of this species.
Prop. 34. Amendment of the annotation to exempt certain
artificially propagated hybrids of Orchidaceae (interspecific and
intergeneric hybrids of Cymbidium, Dendrobium, Miltonia, Odontoglossum,
Oncidium, Phalaenopsis and Vanda) included in Appendix II. Proposed by
Switzerland. Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Oppose. This proposal
would merge existing taxon-specific exemptions on the Orchidaceae
family, but more importantly would broaden exemptions for artificially
propagated hybrids to include the genera Miltonia, Odontoglossum, and
Oncidium. There are concerns that the exemption of New World genera
would create enforcement problems for range countries, a sentiment that
was previously raised at CoP12 and CoP13.
Prop. 35. Amendment of the annotation to exempt certain
artificially propagated hybrids of Orchidaceae (interspecific and
intergeneric hybrids of Cymbidium, Dendrobium, Phalaenopsis, and Vanda)
included in Appendix II. Proposed by Switzerland as the Depositary
Government, at the request of the Plants Committee. Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Support. This proposal would replace confusing
language in the existing taxon-specific orchid hybrid exemptions
(referred to as footnote 8) with language proposed and agreed upon by
consensus of the Plants Committee.
Prop. 37. Deletion of the current annotation for Taxus chinensis,
T. fuana, and T. sumatrana, and adoption of a new annotation for T.
cuspidata in Appendix II. Proposed by Switzerland, as Depositary
Government, at the request of the Standing Committee. Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Support Part A; oppose Part B of the proposal.
The adoption of Part A of this proposal would delete the annotation to
exempt labeled, potted artificially propagated plants of T. chinensis,
T. fuana, and T. sumatrana from CITES regulations. Adoption of Part B
would add a new annotation to the listing of T. cuspidata to exempt
labeled, potted artificially propagated plants of hybrids and cultivars
of the species from CITES regulations. This proposal seeks to rectify
the adoption of an annotation at CoP13 for these taxa, which was
subsequently determined to contravene the provisions of the Convention.
However, it is the opinion of the United States that this proposal is
similarly flawed in that it allows an exemption for whole plants or
artificially propagated hybrids and cultivars of T. cuspidata, but does
not exempt readily recognizable parts and derivatives.
Conclusion of the Meeting
69. Determination of the time and venue of the next regular meeting
of the Conference of the Parties (no document). Tentative U.S.
negotiating position: Not applicable. The Secretariat does not normally
circulate a document on the time and venue of the next CoP. We
anticipate receiving information on this at CoP14, at which time the
United States will develop a negotiating position. The United States
favors holding CoP15 in a country where all Parties and observers will
be admitted without political difficulties, and where facilities are
available to ensure the safe and efficient conduct of the meeting.
70. Closing Remarks (No document)
During our regular public briefings at CoP14, we will discuss any
changes in our negotiating positions. After CoP14, we will publish a
notice to invite public input on whether the United States should take
a reservation on any of the amendments to the CITES Appendices. Whereas
CITES provides a period of 90 days from the close of a CoP for any
Party to enter a reservation with respect to an amendment to Appendix I
or II, the United States has never entered a reservation on any CITES
listing. As discussed in the Federal Register notice of November 17,
1987 (52 FR 43924), entering a reservation would do very little to
relieve importers in the United States from the need for foreign export
permits because the Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 (16 U.S.C. 3371 et
seq.) make it a Federal offense to import into the United States any
taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of foreign
conservation laws. If the foreign nation has enacted CITES, and has not
taken a reservation with regard to any species, part, or derivative,
the United States would continue to require CITES documents as a
condition of import. A reservation by the United States also would
provide exporters in this country with little relief from the need for
U.S. export documents. Receiving countries that are party to CITES will
require CITES-equivalent documentation from the United States even if
it enters a reservation, because the Parties have agreed to allow trade
with non-Parties (including reserving countries) only if they issue
documents containing all of the information required on CITES permits
and certificates, and only if the same findings have been made prior to
issuance of the documents.
Author: This notice was prepared by Clifton A. Horton, Division
of Management Authority; under the authority of the U.S. Endangered
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: May 24, 2007.
[FR Doc. 07-2714 Filed 5-29-07; 11:34 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P