Review of Species Selected on the Basis of the Analysis of 2016 CITES Export Quotas

Home , Candoia carinata, Candoia paulsoni, Manusela National Park, Morelia spilota, Tillandsia xerographica

UNEP-WCMC technical report

Review of species selected on the basis of the Analysis of 2016 CITES export quotas

(Version edited for public release)

Review of species selected on the basis of the Analysis of 2016 CITES export quotas.

Prepared for The European Commission, Directorate General Environment, Directorate E - Global & Regional Challenges, LIFE ENV.E.2. – Global Sustainability, Trade & Multilateral Agreements, Brussels, Belgium

Published September 2016

Citation UNEP-WCMC. 2016. Review of species selected on the basis of the Analysis of 2016 CITES export quotas. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge.

The UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) is the specialist biodiversity assessment centre of the United Nations Environment Programme, the world’s foremost intergovernmental environmental organization. The Centre has been in operation for over 30 years, combining scientific research with policy advice and the development of decision tools.

We are able to provide objective, scientifically rigorous products and services to help decision-makers recognize the value of biodiversity and apply this knowledge to all that they do. To do this, we collate and verify data on biodiversity and ecosystem services that we analyze and interpret in comprehensive assessments, making the results available in appropriate forms for national and international level decision-makers and businesses. To ensure that our work is both sustainable and equitable we seek to build the capacity of partners where needed, so that they can provide the same services at national and regional scales.

The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of UNEP, contributory organisations or editors. The designations employed and the presentations do not imply the expressions of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNEP, the European Commission or contributory organisations, editors or publishers concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city area or its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of a commercial entity or product in this publication does not imply endorsement by UNEP.

UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) 219 Huntingdon Road, Cambridge CB3 0DL, UK Tel: +44 1223 277314 UNEP promotes www.unep-wcmc.org environmentally sound practices globally and in its own activities. Printing on paper from environmentally sustainable forests and i recycled fibre is encouraged. Contents

Introduction and summary ...... 1 Update since Analysis of 2016 CITES export quotas ...... 4 Candoia paulsoni ...... 8 Morelia spp. from Indonesia – Overview of status, management and trade ...... 12 Stigmochelys pardalis ...... 17 Pelochelys signifera ...... 22 Corals from Malaysia (Sarawak) – Overview of status, management and trade ...... 26 Tillandsia xerographica ...... 36 Gonystylus bancanus ...... 40 Appendix ...... 45

Introduction and summary

This report presents a review of taxa selected on the basis of the Analysis of 2016 CITES export quotas and provides an update of new and increased 2016 CITES export quotas published since the production of this Analysis.

National export quotas for CITES listed taxa are an important tool to manage and monitor wildlife trade. The establishment or revision of an export quota should be based on a non-detriment finding (NDF) by the Scientific Authority of the exporting country and the NDF should be reviewed annually (Resolution Conf. 14.7 (Rev. CoP15)). Once such annual quotas are established, the need for a NDF for each individual shipment of the species concerned is eliminated.

The EU, through stricter measures outlined in the Wildlife Trade Regulations, requires an NDF by importing Member States and therefore monitors newly established quotas and changes to previous quota levels to assess the situation where necessary, or to reassess SRG opinions or EU decisions. Similarly, by assessing the new quotas early each year, the SRG can advise on the treatment of anticipated import applications within the EU.

Export quotas are usually established by each Party to CITES unilaterally on a voluntary basis, but they can also be set by the Conference of the Parties, or result from recommendations of the Animals and Plants Committees. To ensure that national quotas are effectively communicated and implemented on permits and certificates, countries should inform the CITES Secretariat when they establish national export quotas for CITES species (Resolution Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP16)). In turn, the Secretariat informs the Parties by publishing a list of national export quotas of which it has been informed (www.cites.org/eng/resources/quotas/index.php).

In 2016, quotas were published on the CITES website (www.cites.org) on 03/04/2016 and were updated on 04/04/2016, 08/04/2016, 12/04/2016, 13/04/2016, 19/04/2016, 26/04/2016, 24/05/2016, 15/07/2016, 21/07/2016 and 25/08/2016.

Based on the quotas that were available on 19/04/2016, UNEP-WCMC analysed the 2016 CITES export quotas to identify:

a) Quotas that were newly established in 2016 (i.e. 2016 quotas for particular taxon/country/term/source combinations that have not previously been subject to a quota, or have not been subject to a quota for at least the last 5 years);

b) Quotas that increased or decreased in 2016 compared with 2015 quotas (or compared with 2014 quotas if no quota was published in 2015).

The following taxon/country combinations are reviewed in this report:

 Cercopithecus spp. / Ethiopia (new quota, 40 live, 10 trophies)  Candoia paulsoni / Indonesia (new quota, 180 live)  Morelia clastolepis / Indonesia (new quota, 45 live)  Morelia nauta / Indonesia (new quota, 45 live)  Morelia tracyae / Indonesia (new quota, 45 live)  Stigmochelys pardalis / Ethiopia (increased quota from 500 live individuals in 2015 to 1000 live individuals in 2016)  Pelochelys signifera / Indonesia (increased quota from 36 live individuals in previous years to 450 live individuals in 2016)

Introduction and summary

 Stony and soft corals / Malaysia - Sarawak (new quotas for live corals concerning nine species and 54 genera)  Tillandsia xerographica / Guatemala (increased quota from 421 570 artificially propagated live plants in 2015 to 991 781 artificially propagated live plants in 2016)  Gonystylus bancanus / Indonesia (increased quota from 4322 m3 of finished products in 2015 to 7203 m3 of finished products in 2016)

Since the publication of the Analysis of 2016 export quotas, it became apparent that Ethiopia had amended its quota for Cercopithecus spp.; the 2016 quota of 40 live and 10 trophies was reassigned to Chlorocebus aethiops. Given that these quotas for Chlorocebus aethiops represented neither new or increased quotas for the species, and that trade to the EU-28 in Cercopithecus species from Ethiopia 2006-2015 consisted of only one wild-sourced trophy (reported by Ethiopia only), Cercopithecus spp. from Ethiopia is not considered further in this report.

Reviews and the corresponding recommendations (Table 1) for the remaining taxon/country combinations are presented below.

Introduction and summary

Update on 2016 export quotas

Update since Analysis of 2016 CITES export quotas

Since the publication of the Analysis of 2016 CITES export quotas, additional CITES export quotas have been published on the CITES website. New and increased quotas for wild-sourced specimens are presented in Table 1. Of those that do not already have a current EU opinion or suspension in place, many relate to Annex A birds, hence they may not warrant further consideration by the SRG at this time.

Uzbekistan’s quota for live, wild-sourced Testudo horsfieldii increased from 50 000 individuals in 2015 to 80 000 individuals in 2016. Direct trade in this species from Uzbekistan to the EU-28 and elsewhere 2006-2015 is presented in Table 2 Imports to the EU-28 have mainly been in live ranched and wild- sourced individuals, both of which have increased over the ten-year period. In addition, 2015 was the first year in which live, captive-bred individuals have been imported into the EU. Uzbekistan also published quotas in 2016 for 20 000 live, ranched individuals and 15 500 live, captive-bred individuals.

T. horsfieldii from Uzbekistan was last reviewed by UNEP-WCMC in 2010; this species/country combination was also categorised as ‘possible concern’ under the CITES Review of Significant Trade Process (and subsequently removed at SC62 in 2012, based on information summarised in SC62 Doc 27.1). The total population in Uzbekistan was reported to number around 20 million tortoises, with most collection from Navoi province (population of ~12 million tortoises), with collection restricted in area and under a 12-year rotation system (SC62 Doc 27.1).

The EU has the following current opinions for T. horsfieldii from Uzbekistan:

o Positive opinion for wild individuals confirmed 14/09/2010. o Positive opinion for ranched individuals (<8cm straight carapace length) formed 08/12/2014. o No opinion i) for source F individuals (Born in captivity, F1 and subsequent, 6-8 cm plastron length) confirmed 27/02/2014.

Update on 2016 export quotas

Table 1: Species subject to new or increased quotas published since the Analysis of 2016 CITES export quotas.

Quota IUCN App./ change Taxon (Common name) Red List Annex Country 2016 quota Notes New Capra falconeri (Markhor) NT I/A Uzbekistan 2 trophies (horn and skull, Previous quota for 2 trophies 2006-2008. Current 4.6(a) skin) suspension for wild trophies since 01/10/2007. Ovis ammon1 (Argali) NT II/B Uzbekistan 6 trophies (horn and skull, No EU decision in place. There was no reported trade in skin) O. ammon from Uzbekistan to the EU-28 or elsewhere 2006-2015. Lynx lynx2 LC II/A Uzbekistan 2 live No EU decision in place. There was no reported trade in wild L. lynx from Uzbekistan to the EU-28 or elsewhere 2006-2015; exports of 6 live captive-bred specimens were reported by Uzbekistan 2007-2009. Panthera leo (Lion) VU II/B Zambia 24 wild Positive opinion for wild, including hunting trophies formed on 07/03/2016. Loxodonta africana (African Elephant) VU I/A Rwanda 0 tusks3 No EU decision in place.

South Sudan 0 tusks5 No EU decision in place.

Cameroon 160 tusks (tusks as Quota of 80 raw ivory in 2015. Current 4.6(a) suspension trophies from 80 animals) for wild trophies since 04/09/2014. Branta ruficollis (Red-breasted Goose) VU II/A Uzbekistan 5 live No EU decision in place. Chlamydotis undulata (Houbara Bustard) VU I/A Uzbekistan 20 live No EU decision in place. Epicrates cenchria cenchria (Brazilian - II/B Suriname 160 live Previous quotas for 160 live at species level 2003-2014. Rainbow Boa) Negative opinion formed for wild Epicrates cenchria on 15/12/2015. Hippocampus barbouri VU II/B Indonesia 8000 live Previous quota for 7650 live in 2008. Current 4.6(b) import (Barbour's Seahorse) suspension since 01/10/2007.

1 Quota published for Ovis ammon severtzovi 2 Quota published for Lynx lynx isabellinus 3 Raw ivory as part of elephant hunting trophies 5

Update on 2016 export quotas

Quota IUCN App./ change Taxon (Common name) Red List Annex Country 2016 quota Notes Increase Accipiter badius (Shikra) LC II/B Uzbekistan 170 live Increase from 100 live 2005-2015. Current no opinion 05/09/2002.. Accipiter gentilis (Northern Goshawk) LC II/A Uzbekistan 200 live Increase from 100 live in 2005. No EU decision in place. Aquila chrysaetos (Golden Eagle) LC II/A Uzbekistan 4 live Increase from 2 live in 2015, but previously 4 live 2005- 2008. No EU decision in place. Falco cherrug EN II/A Uzbekistan 4 live Increase from zero quota 2011-2015. Current CITES (Saker Falcon) suspension for Uzbekistan 14/11/2006 (Notif. No. 2006/061). No EU decision in place. Falco columbarius (Merlin) LC II/A Uzbekistan 60 live Increase from 20 live 2012-2015. No EU decision in place. Falco subbuteo (Eurasian Hobby) LC II/A Uzbekistan 110 live Increase from 50 live 2013-2015. No EU decision in place. Falco tinnunculus (Eurasian Kestrel) LC II/A Uzbekistan 112 live Increase from 50 live 2013-2015. No EU decision in place. Gypaetus barbatus NT II/A Uzbekistan 6 live Increase from 3 live in 2015. No EU decision in place. (Bearded Vulture) Asio otus (Long-eared Owl) LC II/B Uzbekistan 60 live Increase from 40 live 2013-2015. No EU decision in place. Testudo horsfieldii (Steppe Tortoise) VU II/B Uzbekistan 80000 live Increase from 50000 live 2014-2015. Current positive opinion for wild formed on 14/09/2010.

Update on 2016 export quotas

Table 2: Direct exports of Testudo horsfieldii from Uzbekistan to the EU-28 (EU) and the rest of the world (RoW), 2006-2015.

Importer Terms Unit Purpose Source Reported by 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total EU live - T W Importer 1000 9925 5700 6800 11072 18068 17097 15364 16494 20070 121590 Exporter 1000 9470 6700 10800 8100 21275 16600 14630 19123 107698 R Importer 14485 9300 13901 11894 13800 20051 25497 33548 34350 28716 205542 Exporter 14000 12500 14900 11000 13304 20475 26600 29600 45602 187981 U Importer Exporter 4 4 C Importer 1000 1000 Exporter 3 3 I Importer 7 7 Exporter 1012 1012 P W Importer Exporter 1 7 8 R Importer 4 4 Exporter carapaces - T W Importer Exporter 600 600 specimens ml S W Importer 20 20 Exporter 20 20 RoW live - T W Importer 22500 12100 14650 19200 15447 18467 23842 26799 26700 179705 Exporter 25877 12600 14300 21000 18470 19075 23946 29200 31800 196268 R Importer 200 700 600 2100 800 4300 1583 1600 11883 Exporter 1200 1500 3600 1000 4900 3800 7100 23100 I Importer 2000 1000 750 3750 Exporter 1000 1350 2350 P C Importer Exporter 1 1 W Importer Exporter 3 5 8 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 06/09/2016

Candoia paulsoni

REPTILIA: BOIDAE Candoia paulsoni II/B

SYNONYMS: Candoia carinata paulsoni, Enygrus carinatus paulsoni

COMMON NAMES: Paulson’s Bevel-nosed Boa (EN)

RANGE STATES: Indonesia, Papua New Guinea, Solomon Islands

UNDER REVIEW: Indonesia

EU DECISIONS: Current no opinion ii) for wild specimens from Indonesia formed on 06/12/2013. Previous negative opinion for wild specimens from Indonesia originally formed on 11/09/2012 for Candoia carinata, from which C. paulsoni was split following CoP16. Previous positive opinion for C. carinata from Indonesia formed on 09/10/1997.

Current no opinion ii) for wild specimens from the Solomon Islands formed on 06/12/2013.

IUCN: Not assessed

Taxonomic note

Candoia paulsoni was recognised as a distinct species by Smith et al. (2001), being previously classified under Candoia carinata. Smith et al. (2001) was adopted as the CITES Standard Reference at CITES CoP16 in 2013 (Resolution Conf. 12.11 (Rev. CoP16)), and recognises six subspecies.

Note that C. paulsoni from Indonesia was previously reviewed by UNEP-WCMC in 2013, as part of a report on species affected by CoP16 nomenclature changes that were subject to EU decisions (UNEP- WCMC, 2013). . Trade patterns

Candoia paulsoni was listed in Appendix II on 04/02/1977 and in Annex B of the EU Wildlife Trade Regulations on 01/06/1997 as part of the family listing for Boidae.

Indonesia has submitted annual reports for the years 2006-2014, but has not yet submitted an annual report for 2015. In 2016, Indonesia published their first quota specifically for C. paulsoni, of 180 live individuals.

Indonesia published annual export quotas for live C. carinata (from which C. paulsoni split) each year from 1997 (Table 1). Quotas for C. carinata may have been exceeded by 38 individuals in 2006 and by 16 individuals in 2009, according to Indonesia. It was not specified whether the 2006 or 2009 Indonesian annual reports were based on permits issued or actual trade, therefore it is not certain that all of this trade actually took place.

Candoia paulsoni

Table 1: CITES export quotas for live Candoia carinata (from which C. paulsoni was split following CITES CoP16 in 2013) from Indonesia, and global direct exports as reported by the countries of import and Indonesia 2006-2013.

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Quota 1080 1080 1080 1080 1080 1080 1080 1080 Reported by importers 884 675 686 357 529 592 455 305 Reported by Indonesia 1118 1077 1080 1096 1071 1000 994 946

There has never been any reported direct or indirect trade in C. paulsoni from Indonesia to the EU-28 or countries other than the EU-28. Prior to the split of C. paulsoni from C. carinata in 2013, direct exports of C. carinata from Indonesia to the EU-28 and other countries was reported (Table 2). Direct exports from Indonesia to the EU-28 and other countries mainly consisted of live wild-sourced individuals exported for commercial purposes, with smaller quantities of source C and F (Table 2). Small quantities of live wild-sourced C. carinata originating from Indonesia have also been imported indirectly into the EU-28 2006-2013 (only 10 live wild-sourced individuals reported by EU importers).

Table 2: Direct exports of Candoia carinata (from which C. paulsoni was split following CITES CoP16 in 2013) from Indonesia to the EU-28 (EU) and the rest of the world (RoW), 2006-2015. No trade was reported 2014-2015. All trade reported was in live individuals.

Importer Purpose Source Reported by 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Total EU P W Importer 4 6 10 Exporter 10 T C Importer 10 Exporter F Importer 80 80 Exporter 100 7 107 W Importer 225 236 316 91 49 150 43 1110 Exporter 345 366 424 106 143 231 90 54 1759 - I Importer 1 1 Exporter RoW Q W Importer 4 4 Exporter T C Importer 40 25 65 Exporter F Importer 149 76 93 9 10 337 Exporter 51 66 99 12 228 I Importer 20 20 Exporter W Importer 506 439 365 184 267 403 385 295 2844 Exporter 622 711 656 924 822 757 895 892 6279 - Importer 2 2 Exporter S W Importer Exporter 9 9 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 10/08/2016.

Candoia paulsoni

Conservation status

Candoia paulsoni is a relatively small, non-venomous boa (Smith et al. 2001), known to inhabit both forests and cultivated land, and described as primarily ground-dwelling (O’Shea, 2007). The species has been reported to reach 0.8-1.3 m in length, producing relatively large clutches of 30-50 neonates at a time (O’Shea, 2007).

C. paulsoni was reported to have a fragmented distribution with three distinct geographical divisions: the eastern division was documented to include the Solomon Islands and small islands to the east of Papua New Guinea, the central division includes parts of the northeastern mainland of Papua New Guinea extending southeast to the d’Entrecastaux island archipelago, and the western division principally includes the Indonesian islands of Halmahera and Talaud, and possibly also Sulawesi (O’Shea, 2007; Smith et al., 2001; Koch et al., 2009).

The species has not yet been assessed by the IUCN. A provisional categorisation of C. carinata, C. paulsoni and C. superciliosa (all part of the ‘Candoia carinata complex’) in the Pacific Islands of Oceania determined that they should be listed as Least Concern (Pippard, 2012).

Indonesia: C. paulsoni tasmai was reported to be the only subspecies of C. paulsoni found in Indonesia (Smith et al. 2001; de Lang, 2013). It was described as moderately to highly arboreal, feeding primarily on small mammals and becoming quickly defensive when disturbed (de Lang, 2013). The subspecies was documented to occur in the eastern Indonesian province of Maluku (the Moluccan Islands), on the northeastern islands of Bacan, Halmahera, Morotai, Moti, Ternate and Tidore, as well as the Talaud Islands (Smith et al., 2001; de Lang and Vogel, 2006; Koch et al., 2009; de Lang, 2013), with possible sightings also on the tip of the northeastern arm of Sulawesi and its nearby islands (e.g. Smith et al., 2001; de Lang and Vogel, 2006; de Lang, 2013). C. p. tasmai was considered the most isolated population of C. paulsoni, found at the western limit of the species’ range, separated from the central population by 800 km (Smith et al., 2001). Within the island of Halmahera, de Lang (2013) reported the species in Batu Lubang Cave, Dodaga, Kao, Kampung Durian, Labilabi, Loleba, Mamuya, Pasirputih, Patani, Soakonora, Sofifi, To-belo, and Wasile. On Morotai, the species was reported to be found in Goegoeti and Marilakoe, and on Tidore island, it was found in Rum and Soasiu (de Lang, 2013). It was reported that C. p. tasmai was found in a variety of habitats on Halmahera, including human settlement, wet rice fields, and in secondary and primary forest (Setiadi and Hamidi, 2006 in: de Lang, 2013).

C. p. tasmai was mentioned by de Lang and Vogel (2006) as a priority taxon to survey, considering that it appeared to be either “relatively rare or a potential victim of human activities”. Although there was no precise information on C. p. tasmai’s population size in Indonesia (de Lang, 2013), Iskandar and Erdelen (2006) reported that population sizes, status and trends for many Indonesian snake species were generally still unknown. It was noted that the main threat to Indonesian reptiles was habitat destruction, which is taking place at an increasing rate (Iskandar and Erdelen, 2006). Wildlife trade was also reported to impact Indonesian reptiles (Iskandar and Erdelen, 2006). De Lang (2013) reported that there was a pet trade market for Candoia carinata (which C. paulsoni was previously listed under), and if needed it could be collected in Papua and the Moluccan Islands, where it seemed to be abundant (Yuwono, 1998 in: de Lang, 2013); the status of C. paulsoni in the Moluccas was reported to be unknown (de Lang, 2013).

C. paulsoni is not listed as a protected species in Indonesia (Republic of Indonesia, 1999), and harvest from the wild is permitted under annual quotas (Natusch and Lyons, 2012). The CITES Management Authority (MA) of Indonesia reported that wild harvest was allowed for abundant species and that their approach for establishing quotas was precautionary, taking into consideration factors such as population size, trends, geographic range and harvest location (CITES MA of Indonesia, 2011). The national quota was reported to be split and allocated to provinces, with export permits then being

Candoia paulsoni

issued at the national level (CITES MA of Indonesia, 2011). Natusch and Lyons (2012) noted that hunters and traders must be registered, and have the relevant permits to capture, transport and sell wildlife. However, it has been documented that harvest quotas are “inadequately monitored and enforced” in Indonesia due to low levels of human resources and funding (Lee et al., 2005; Shepherd and Nijman, 2007).

Two separate areas of forest are protected on Halmahera Island as part of the Aketajawe-Lolobata National Park (Setiadi et al., 2010), and approximately 350 km2 of forest is protected as a wildlife reserve on the island of Karakelang (within the Talaud archipelago), although it was found that management in this reserve was lacking (Riley, 2003). Information on the occurrence of C. p. tasmai within these protected areas could not be located.

The CITES Authorities of Indonesia were consulted in July 2016 regarding status and management of C. paulsoni in Indonesia, but a response had not been received at the time of writing. References

Allison, A., Hamilton, A. and Tallowin, O. 2012. Candoia paulsoni. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2016.1. Available at: http://www.iucnredlist.org/. [Accessed: 14 July 2016]. Iskandar, D.T. and Erdelen, W.R. 2006. Conservation of amphibians and reptiles in Indonesia: issues and problems. Amphibian and Reptile Conservation, 4(1): 60–87. Koch, A., Arida, E., Riyanto, A. and Böhme, W. 2009. Islands between the realms: A revised checklist of the herpetofauna of the Talaud archipelago, Indonesia, with a discussion about its biogeographic affinities. Bonner Zoologische Beitrage, 56: 107–129. de Lang, R. 2013. The snakes of the Moluccas (Maluku), Indonesia. A field guide to the land and non-marine aquatic snakes of the Moluccas with identification key. Edition Chimaira, Frankfurt am Main, Germany. 417 pp. de Lang, R. and Vogel, G. 2006. The snakes of Sulawesi. In: Vences, M., Köhler, T. and Böhme, W. (Eds.). Proceedings of the 13th Congress of the Societas Europaea Herpetologica. Herpetologia Bonnensis II. 35–38. Lee, R.J., Gorog, A.J., Dwiyahreni, A., Siwu, S., Riley, J., Alexander, H., Paoli, G.D. and Ramono, W. 2005. Wildlife trade and implications for law enforcement in Indonesia: a case study from north Sulawesi. Biological Conservation, 123: 477–488. Lyons, J.A. and Natusch, D.J.D. 2011. Wildlife laundering through breeding farms: Illegal harvest, population declines and a means of regulating the trade of green pythons (Morelia viridis) from Indonesia. Biological Conservation, 144(12): 3073–3081. Nash, S. V. 1993. Problems with Implementation of CITES Article IV in Southeast Asia, Review No. 1: Indonesia. 34 pp. Natusch, D.J.D. and Lyons, J.A. 2012. Exploited for pets: the harvest and trade of amphibians and reptiles from Indonesian New Guinea. Biodiversity and Conservation, 21: 2899–2911. O’Shea 2007. Boas and pythons of the world. New Holland Publishers, London, U.K. 160 pp. Pippard, H. 2012. The current status and distribution of reptiles in the Pacific Islands of Oceania. IUCN Oceania Regional Office. 1-14 pp. Republic of Indonesia 1999. Indonesian Government Regulation No. 7 concerning the preservation of wild plants and animals. Peraturan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia, Indonesia. Riley, J. 2003. Population sizes and the conservation status of endemic and restricted-range bird species on Karakelang, Talaud Islands, Indonesia. Bird Conservation International, 13: 59–74. Setiadi, M.I. and Hamidi, A. 2006. Jenis-jenis herpetofauna di pulau Halmahera. Report Universitas Indonesia. Depok and Museum Zoologicum Bogoriense, Cibinong. Setiadi, M.I., Hamidy, A., Abidin, Z., Susanto, D., Brown, R.M., Peterson, a T., Li, X. and Evans, B.J. 2010. Genetic structure of herpetofauna on Halmahera Island, Indonesia: implications for Aketajawe-Lolobata National Park. Conservation Biology, 24(2): 553–62. Shepherd, C.R. and Nijman, V. 2007. An overview of the regulation of the freshwater turtle and tortoise pet trade in Jakarta, Indonesia. TRAFFIC Southeast Asia, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia. 62 pp. Smith, H.M., Chiszar, D., Tepedelen, K. and van Breukelen, F. 2001. A revision of the bevel-nosed Boas (Candoia carinata complex) (Reptilia: Serpentes). Hamadryad, 26(2): 283–315. UNEP-WCMC. 2013. Overview of the impact of CITES CoP16 nomenclature changes on current EU decisions. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge. Yuwono, F.B. 1998. The trade of live reptiles in Indonesia. In: Erdelen, W. (Ed.). Conservation, trade and sustainable use of lizards and snakes in Indonesia. Mertensiella 9. Deutsche gesellschaft für herpetologie und terrarienkunde e. V. Rheinbach, Germany. 9–15.

Morelia spp.

Morelia spp. from Indonesia – Overview of status, management and trade Taxonomic note

All species of the family Pythonidae are listed in CITES Appendix II, including eleven recognised species of the genus Morelia. The three species subject to review - M. clastolepis, M. nauta, and M. tracyae – are all newly-described species endemic to Indonesia, which were previously classified under M. amethistina (Harvey et al., 2000 - CITES Standard Reference, adopted at CoP12 in 2002). These three species form part of the ‘Morelia amethistina complex’, a group of five closely related scrub pythons including: Morelia amethistina, which occurs in Australia, Indonesia and Papua New Guinea, M. kinghorni, which is only present in Australia, and M. clastolepis, M. nauta, and M. tracyae, which only occur in Indonesia (Harvey et al., 2000). A recent species-level phylogeny of Boidae and Pythonidae families found support for the Australasian/ Indonesian clade of scrub pythons (M. amethistina, M. boeleni, M. clastolepis, M. kinghorni, M. nauta, M. oenpelliensis and M. tracyae), but noted that it was likely paraphyletic with respect to the other Morelia species, and that it should have a new generic name – Simalia (Reynolds et al., 2014). Of the seven Morelia species occurring in Indonesia, only three have been assessed by the IUCN (Table 1).

Table 1: Morelia species occurring in Indonesia.

Under Indonesia 2016 IUCN Species Distribution EU decisions review CITES export quota Red List Positive opinion for wild M. amethistina Australia, Indonesia, 135 live LC specimens from Indonesia, (Scrub Python) Papua New Guinea formed on 06/12/2013 Article 4.6(b) import suspension M. boeleni Indonesia, Papua New currently in place for wild - - (Boelen's Python) Guinea specimens from Indonesia, valid since 24/09/2000 M. clastolepis Yes 45 live Indonesia - - (Moluccan Python) M. nauta Yes 45 live Indonesia - - (Tanimbar-island Python) M. spilota 270 live Australia, Indonesia, LC - (Carpet Python) (ssp. M. s. harrisoni) Papua New Guinea M. tracyae Yes 45 live Indonesia - - (Halmahera Python) M. viridis Australia, Indonesia, - LC - (Green Tree Python) Papua New Guinea

Trade patterns

Morelia spp. were listed in Appendix II on 04/02/1977 and in Annex B of the EU Wildlife Trade Regulations on 01/06/1997 as part of the family listing for Pythonidae.

Indonesia has submitted annual reports for the years 2006-2014, but has not yet submitted an annual report for 2015. Indonesia published annual export quotas for M. clastolepis, M. nauta and M. tracyae for the first time in 2016, with a quota of 45 live individuals for each species. Indonesia published annual export quotas for live M. amethistina 1997-2016 (Table 1); it is possible these three species may have been traded under the name M. amethistina (e.g. CITES Asian Snake Trade Workshop, 2011). Quotas for M. amethistina appear to have been exceeded every year 2006-2012 and 2014 according to Indonesia, and in 2009 according to importers. Indonesia has reported that annual reports 2011-2013 were based on

Morelia spp.

permits issued rather than actual trade; it is not clear on what basis other annual reports were produced.

Table 1: CITES export quotas for live Morelia amethistina from Indonesia, 2006-2015, and global direct exports as reported by the countries of import and Indonesia 2006- 2015. (M. clastolepis, M. nauta and M. tracyae form part of the ‘M. amethistina complex’, although were recognised as distinct species under CITES following CoP12 in 2002).

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Quota 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 450 300 300 Reported by importers 437 407 327 476 253 267 229 194 247 65 Reported by Indonesia 609 678 611 717 727 699 678 371 610 -

There has never been any reported direct trade in M. clastolepis, M. nauta or M. tracyae from Indonesia to the EU-28 or elsewhere. One live wild-sourced M. nauta originating from Indonesia was imported to the EU-28 from Switzerland in 2012 for commercial purposes, as reported by the importer and exporter.

Trade in M. amethistina is shown in Table 2, as trade in M. clastolepis, M. nauta and M. tracyae may have been reported under this species. Direct exports of M. amethistina from Indonesia to the EU-28 and other countries 2006-2015 mainly consisted of live wild-sourced and source F individuals exported for commercial purposes (Table 1). Direct exports to countries other than the EU-28 also included two wild-sourced skins exported for commercial purposes in 2014. There was virtually no reported indirect trade in M. amethistina originating from Indonesia to the EU-28 2006-2015, nor was there any trade reported at the genus level (Morelia spp.).

Table 2: Direct exports of Morelia amethistina from Indonesia to the EU-28 (EU) and the rest of the world (RoW), 2006-2015. (M. clastolepis, M. nauta and M. tracyae form part of the ‘M. amethistina complex’, although were recognised as distinct species under CITES following CoP12 in 2002).

Importer Term Purpose Source Reported by 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total EU live B C Importer 5 5 Exporter T C Importer 18 25 43 Exporter 12 19 22 70 123 F Importer 50 22 38 75 12 40 25 55 43 360 Exporter 25 20 46 37 24 16 82 250 W Importer 97 141 141 72 26 73 67 16 35 22 690 Exporter 201 190 171 93 90 65 90 48 54 1002 RoW live T C Importer 4 39 63 21 1 10 138 Exporter 7 118 60 10 235 430 F Importer 103 87 33 109 55 40 50 59 74 610 Exporter 146 208 115 213 153 176 228 10 1249 W Importer 187 157 111 181 79 103 67 84 83 1052 Exporter 237 260 279 355 323 360 268 323 241 2646 - Importer 4 4 Exporter skins T W Importer Exporter 2 2 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 11/08/2016.

Morelia spp.

Conservation status

Scrub pythons (Morelia spp.) are medium to very large sized pythons, living in tropical rainforests, dry forests and monsoon rainforests and also in scrublands (de Lang, 2013). They are non-venomous, terrestrial and arboreal species which reproduce by laying eggs and generally capture their prey at night (de Lang, 2013).

Whilst there was little information on the biology of the three species under review, it is likely that pythons within the Morelia amethistina complex hold similar life history characteristics (Harvey et al., 2000); it has been reported that M. amethistina lays clutches of approximately 11 eggs per year (Shine, 1995).

The population sizes of M. clastolepis, M. nauta, and M. tracyae were reported to be unknown, although they have very restricted distributions (de Lang, 2013).

There was reported to be a pet trade market for all three species under review (de Lang, 2013). Indonesian reptiles were reported to be increasingly harvested for the pet trade (Lyons and Natusch, 2011; Natusch and Lyons, 2012a,b), with concerns expressed over sustainability of harvest and illegal trade (Allison, 2007; Frazier, 2007; Lyons and Natusch, 2011 in: Natusch and Lyons 2012c). In addition to the legal trade in endemic, Indonesian reptiles, a high level of illegal trade in these species has been reported as taking place (Lyons and Natusch, 2011; Nijman et al., 2012). Despite many snakes being heavily exploited for their skins in Indonesia (i.e. Python spp.), there was no evidence that this practice took place across Morelia spp. (Kasterine et al., 2012).

None of the Morelia species are protected under Indonesian law (Regulation No. 7, Republic of Indonesia, 1999). Indonesian national legislation stipulates that all trade in native non-protected species is regulated by a harvest and export quota system (Shepherd and Nijman, 2007; Natusch and Lyons, 2012c). Quotas are assessed annually at a meeting between the CITES Scientific Authority (the Indonesian Institute of Sciences, LIPI), the CITES Management Authority (the Directorate General of Forest Protection and Nature Conservation, PHKA), non-government organisations and traders (Shepherd and Nijman, 2007; Natusch and Lyons, 2012c). Natusch and Lyons (2012c) suggested that many species were “poorly known by Indonesian authorities”, which encouraged easy mis-labelling of species and allowed illegally harvested animals to be traded openly (e.g. Lyons and Natusch, 2011). It was also reported that harvest quotas were “inadequately monitored and enforced” in Indonesia due to low levels of human resources and funding (Lee et al., 2005; Shepherd and Nijman, 2007).

The CITES Authorities of Indonesia were consulted in July 2016 regarding status and management of M. clastolepis, M. nauta, and M. tracyae in Indonesia, but a response had not been received at the time of writing.

Morelia clastolepis: M. clastolepis is a large scrub python that is endemic to Indonesia (Harvey et al., 2000), reaching up to 4 m in length (Kopstein, 1926 in: Harvey et al., 2000; de Lang, 2013). It was documented to occur in the eastern Indonesian province of Maluku (the Moluccan Islands), west of New Guinea, on the islands of Ambon and Seram, the nearby islands of Haruku and Saparua (although initial reports classified these as M. amethistina), and most likely on the Banda Islands (Harvey et al., 2000; de Lang, 2013). On Seram, it was reported to be found in lowland rainforest and lowland riverine forests (Edgar and Lilley, 1993 in: Harvey et al., 2000).

The species was reported to be in demand for the pet trade and collected from the Moluccan Islands, where it was considered common (Yuwono, 1998 in: de Lang, 2013).

Morelia spp.

It was suggested that M. clastolepis is being traded at high levels under the false classification of M. amethistina or Morelia spp., which is likely to have a severe impact on the species’ restricted populations (CITES Asian Snake Trade Workshop, 2011).

It has been reported that the species does not acclimatise well to captivity, and reproduces with difficulty in captive environments (De Groot, 2015).

Morelia nauta: M. nauta is a smaller-sized scrub python, endemic to Indonesia (Harvey et al., 2000), reaching a maximum of 2.2 m (de Lang, 2013). It was documented to occur solely on the Tanimbar Islands, which are a group of islands situated in the eastern Indonesian province of Maluku (Harvey et al., 2000), namely on Yamdena Island (in Latdalam, Saumlaki, and Sifnana Omele districts), and on Laibobar Island (de Lang, 2013). M. nauta was reported to be found in most habitats and in most areas on the islands, although strongly associated with forest, and to be common on Yamdena Island (D.G. Barker, pers. comm. in: de Lang, 2013).

Morelia tracyae: M. tracyae is a larger-sized scrub python reaching over 4 m in length (de Lang, 2013) that has been reported to occur on the northwestern side of the island of Halmahera, in the northeastern Indonesian province of North Maluku (Harvey et al., 2000; de Lang, 2013). Within Halmahera, Harvey et al. (2000) reported the species to range from Galela and Tobelo districts in the north to the Jailolo district in the centre of the island, and de Lang (2013) documented the species’ occurrence within Bobaneigu, Galela, Jailolo Loleba, Pasirputih, Soakonora Subaim, Tobelo and Totipa districts. De Lang (2013) also documented the species occurrance on the nearby island of Bacan. The species was reported to be considered common within its distribution range (Yuwono, 1998 in: de Lang, 2013).

Harvey et al. (2000) reported that M. tracyae were generally arboreal, although collectors frequently encountered them on the ground. It was also recorded that M. tracyae were most likely to be found near fruit bat roosts as fruit bats are their main source of prey (Harvey et al., 2000). O’Shea (2007) reported that M. tracyae looked similar to Python reticulatus, which was documented to be the only other python to be found on the island of Halmahera (Harvey et al., 2000). Python reticulatus was recorded as being locally harvested for its skin (O’Shea, 2007). References

Allison, A. 2007. The herpetofauna of Indonesia’s Papua province, New Guinea. In: Marshall, A.J. and Beehler, B.M. (Eds.). The ecology of Papua. Periplus Press, Singapore. 564–616. Auliya, M. 2010. Morelia amethistina. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2016.1. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org. [Accessed: 24 June 2016]. CITES Asian Snake Trade Workshop 2011. CITES Asian Snake Trade Workshop. In: Guangzhou, China, 11th- 14th April. Edgar, P.W. and Lilley, R.P.H. 1993. Herpetofauna survey of Manusela National Park. In: Edwards, I.D., MacDonald, A.A. and Proctor, J. (Eds.). Natural history of Seram Maluku, Indonesia. Intercept Ltd, Andover, England. 131– 141. Frazier, S. 2007. Threats to biodiversity. In: Marshall, A.J. and Beehler, B.M. (Eds.). The ecology of Papua. Periplus Press, Singapore. 1199–1229. De Groot, M. 2015. Simalia clastolepis ‘Moluccan Python’. Available at: http://www.pythonidae.nl/pythons-morelia- clastolepis.html. [Accessed: 27 June 2016]. Harvey, M.B., Barker, D.G., Ammerman, L.K. and Chippindale, P.T. 2000. Systematics of pythons of the Morelia amethistina complex (Serpentes: Boidae) with the description of three new species. Herpetological Monographs, 14: 139–185. Iskandar, D.T. and Erdelen, W.R. 2006. Conservation of amphibians and reptiles in Indonesia: issues and problems. Amphibian and Reptile Conservation, 4(1): 60–87. Kasterine, A., Arbeid, R., Caillabet, O. and Natusch, D. 2012. The trade in South-East Asian python skins. International Trade Centre, Geneva, Switzerland. 74 pp. Kopstein, F. 1926. Reptilien von den Molukken und den benachbarten Inseln. Zoologische Mededelingen, 9: 71–112. de Lang, R. 2013. The snakes of the Moluccas (Maluku), Indonesia. A field guide to the land and non-marine aquatic snakes of the Moluccas with identification key. Edition Chimaira, Frankfurt am Main, Germany. 417 pp.

Morelia spp.

Lee, R.J., Gorog, A.J., Dwiyahreni, A., Siwu, S., Riley, J., Alexander, H., Paoli, G.D. and Ramono, W. 2005. Wildlife trade and implications for law enforcement in Indonesia: a case study from north Sulawesi. Biological Conservation, 123: 477–488. Lyons, J.A. and Natusch, D.J.D. 2011. Wildlife laundering through breeding farms: Illegal harvest, population declines and a means of regulating the trade of green pythons (Morelia viridis) from Indonesia. Biological Conservation, 144(12): 3073–3081. Nash, S. V. 1993. Problems with Implementation of CITES Article IV in Southeast Asia, Review No. 1: Indonesia. 34 pp. Natusch, D.J.D. and Lyons, J.A. 2012a. Distribution, ecological attributes and trade of the New Guinea carpet python (Morelia spilota) in Indonesia. Australian Journal of Zoology, 59(4): 236–241. Natusch, D.J.D. and Lyons, J.A. 2012b. Ecological attributes and trade of the white-lipped pythons (Genus Leiopython) in Indonesian New Guinea. Australian Journal of Zoology, 59(5): 339–343. Natusch, D.J.D. and Lyons, J.A. 2012c. Exploited for pets: the harvest and trade of amphibians and reptiles from Indonesian New Guinea. Biodiversity and Conservation, 21: 2899–2911. Nijman, V., Shepherd, C.R., Sanders, K.L. and Sanders, M. 2012. Over-exploitation and illegal trade of reptiles in Indonesia. Herpetological Journal, 22: 83–89. O’Shea 2007. Boas and pythons of the world. New Holland Publishers, London, U.K. 160 pp. Republic of Indonesia 1999. Indonesian Government Regulation No. 7 concerning the preservation of wild plants and animals. Peraturan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia, Indonesia. Reynolds, Niemiller, M.L., Revell, L.J., Graham Reynolds, R., Niemiller, M.L. and Revell, L.J. 2014. Toward a Tree-of- Life for the boas and pythons: multilocus species-level phylogeny with unprecedented taxon sampling. Molecular phylogenetics and evolution, 71(February): 201–213. Shepherd, C.R. and Nijman, V. 2007. An overview of the regulation of the freshwater turtle and tortoise pet trade in Jakarta, Indonesia. TRAFFIC Southeast Asia, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia. 62 pp. Shine, R. 1995. Australian snakes: a natural history. Cornell University Press, Ithaca, New York. 224 pp. Yuwono, F.B. 1998. The trade of live reptiles in Indonesia Erdelen, W. (Ed.). Mertensiella, 9: 9–15.

Stigmochelys pardalis

REPTILIA: TESTUDINIDAE Stigmochelys pardalis II/B

SYNONYMS: Geochelone pardalis, Testudo pardalis

COMMON NAMES: Leopard Tortoise (EN), Tortue-léopard du Cap (FR), Tortuga Leopardo (ES)

RANGE STATES: Angola, Botswana, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Kenya, Malawi, Mozambique, Namibia, Rwanda, Somalia, South Africa, South Sudan, Swaziland, Uganda, United Republic of Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe

UNDER REVIEW: Ethiopia

EU DECISIONS: There are no current or previous EU decision for this species from Ethiopia.

Article 4.6(b) suspension currently in place for wild specimens from the Democratic Republic of the Congo, first applied on 03/02/2001 and last confirmed on 28/05/2015. Article 4.6(b) suspension currently in place for wild specimens from Uganda, first applied on 10/05/2006 and last confirmed on 28/05/2015.

Current no opinion ii) for wild specimens from Mozambique formed on 15/09/2015 (comes into effect following removal from the Suspension Regulation). Current no opinion i) for ranched specimens from Mozambique formed on 28/05/2014.

Current no opinions for Namibia and Swaziland formed on 10/12/1999 (originally formed for Geochelone pardalis).

Current no opinion i) for wild specimens from the United Republic of Tanzania formed on 14/09/2010. Current positive opinion for specimens born in captivity (F1 and subsequent) of less than 8 cm from the United Republic of Tanzania formed on 29/10/2001.

Current no opinion iii) for ranched specimens and for specimens born in captivity (F1 and subsequent) from Zambia formed on 28/05/2014. Current no opinion iii) for wild-sourced individuals from Zambia formed on 25/06/2004.

IUCN: Least Concern

Taxonomic note

Fritz and Bininda-Emonds (2007) placed Stigmochelys pardalis in the genus Stigmochelys based on morphological differences, which is accepted by the current CITES Standard Reference for Testudines (Fritz and Havaš, 2007). The species was previously included in the genus Geochelone (Pritchard, 1979), and Le et al. (2006) classified it within the genus Psammobates. Fritz and Havaš (2007) also distinguished two subspecies: S. p. pardalis and S. p. babcocki, however a more recent African-wide

Stigmochelys pardalis phylogenetic study concluded that there was no basis for recognising S. p. babcocki as a separate species (Fritz et al., 2010). Trade patterns

Stigmochelys pardalis (formerly Geochelone pardalis) was listed in Appendix II on 01/07/1975 and in Annex B of the EU Wildlife Trade Regulations on 01/06/1997 as part of the family listing for Testudinidae.

Ethiopia has submitted annual reports for the years 2006-2007, 2010-2011 and 2014-2015, but has not yet submitted annual reports for 2008-2009 or 2012-2013. Ethiopia have published annual export quotas for S. pardalis from 2004-2009 and 2011-2015 for 500 live individuals (Table 1), and in 2016 for 1000 live individuals. Trade appears to have remained within quota.

Table 1: CITES export quotas for live Stigmochelys pardalis from Ethiopia, 2006-2016, and global direct exports as reported by the countries of import and Ethiopia 2006- 2015. No trade was reported 2008-2009.

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Quota 500 500 500 500 - 500 500 500 500 500 1000 Reported by importers 380 10 - - - 20 15 30 10 - - Reported by Ethiopia 400 100 - - 66 53 - - 120 500 -

Direct exports of S. pardalis from Ethiopia to the EU-28 2006-2015 comprised of live wild-sourced individuals exported for commercial purposes, mainly exported 2006-2007 (Table 2). Direct trade in S. pardalis from Ethiopia to countries other than the EU-28 2006-2015 mainly comprised low levels of live wild-sourced individuals exported for commercial purposes between 2006 and 2014, with 500 individuals exported in 2015, as reported by Ethiopia.

No indirect exports of S. pardalis to the EU-28 originating in Ethiopia were reported 2006-2015.

Table 2: Direct exports of Stigmochelys pardalis from Ethiopia to the EU-28 (EU) and the rest of the world (RoW), 2006-2015. No trade was reported in 2009.

Importer Term Purpose Source Reported by 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total EU live T W Importer 380 20 400 Exporter 330 100 40 30 500 RoW carving T I Importer 2 2 Exporter live B W Importer 10 10 Exporter T C Importer 15 15 Exporter 30 30 W Importer 30 10 40 Exporter 70 26 53 60 500 709 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 10/08/2016. Conservation status

Stigmochelys pardalis is a large, diurnal, land-dwelling tortoise with a distinctly domed carapace (Broadley, 1989; Vetter, 2005). On average, S. pardalis has been reported to measure 30-45 cm in carapace length, and weigh 7–15 kg, although individuals between 35-60 cm in length and 15-20 kg are also known to be common (Vetter, 2005; Bartlett and Bartlett, 2006). S. pardalis was documented to reach sexual maturity between 10 – 15 years of age, and is considered to have a relatively high reproductive rate, due to its ability to lay 3-5 clutches of 4-15 eggs per season (Vetter, 2005; Bartlett and

Stigmochelys pardalis

Bartlett, 2006). Clutch size was found to increase with the size of the female (Baker and Grubb, 2011). Loveridge and Williams (1957) estimated the potential life expectancy of S. pardalis to be 42 years or more, however they reported that it was unlikely for individuals to live more than 21 years in fire- hazardous environments.

S. pardalis was considered to be the most widely distributed Sub-Saharan tortoise (Fritz et al., 2010), with a range of 5 725 982 km2 (Buhlmann et al., 2009). The species was reported to occur from southern Sudan and Ethiopia southwards to South Africa, and westwards to southern Angola and Namibia (Fritz and Havaš, 2007). S. pardalis was reported to prefer dry and hot biotopes, occupying a range of habitats including savannah, dry forest or thornbush, grass vegetation, and semidesert bushland, from sea-level to approximately 2900 m altitude (Hailey and Coulson, 1995; Mason et al., 2000; Vetter, 2005; Malonza et al., 2006; Branch, 2008). S. p. babcocki has been found to be widely distributed across the species range (including in Ethiopia), whereas S. p. pardalis has been reported to occupy a narrower range, from South Africa to Namibia (Broadley 1989; Fritz and Havaš, 2007).

S. pardalis was categorised as Least Concern by the IUCN, based on its widespread distribution and lack of severe threats (Baker et al., 2015). Although total population estimates for this species are unknown, Bonin et al. (2006) documented populations as “still numerous” and Broadley (1989) previously described the species as being “in no danger”. Branch (2008) found that there was no evidence of range contractions or local extinctions, however Broadley (1989) and McDougal (2000) reported that S. pardalis was rare in regions with high human populations, as a result of overexploitation. It has been documented that population numbers were lower in drier habitats, in response to low recruitment rates, food availability and inability to escape adverse conditions (e.g. fires) in these locations (McMaster and Downs, 2009, 2006; Baker et al., 2015).

The international pet trade was documented to have contributed to a regional decline of S. pardalis populations (Vetter, 2005; Baker et al., 2015), and in 2005 it was suggested that should the rate of removal from the wild remain constant, S. pardalis was likely to become severely threatened in Kenya, Mozambique and Tanzania (Vetter, 2005). The species was also reported to be harvested for medicinal purposes and to be infrequently hunted for food by indigenous populations (Kabigumila, 1998; Bonin 2006; Baker and Grubb, 2011; Baker et al., 2015). Amir (2007 in: Baker et al., 2015) reported an increased demand for tortoise bones from China and South East Asia. Baker et al. (2015) also expressed concern over the potential for sudden, severe population crashes due to the collection of (mainly) adult specimens for human consumption. It was noted that such overharvesting might be occurring as a result of the recent increase in foreign contractors and large-scale development projects, with improved transport and economic links between Africa and East Asia (Baker et al., 2015). Bush fires were considered an additional threat to the species (Broadley, 1989; Vetter, 2005; Baker et al. 2015), as well as habitat fragmentation due to human encroachment (Vetter, 2005), nest depredation by natural predators (Vetter, 2005), and death from electric fences (Baker et al., 2015). S. pardalis have been reported as agricultural pests across their geographic range, which has resulted in retaliatory killings (Kabigumila, 1998).

S. pardalis was considered well-suited for captive production (Spawls et al., 2002; Highfield and Martin, 2014). S. pardalis was reviewed by UNEP-WCMC in 2014 the context of the sustainability of its captive production and ranching in Mozambique and Zambia(UNEP-WCMC, 2014).

The species was subjected to the CITES Review of Significant Trade process in 1999, during which it was concluded that “although there remains little information on population status, the species appears to occur in sizeable numbers and is found within several protected areas” (UNEP-WCMC et al., 1999). Ethiopia was not retained in the review process (AC15 Proceedings).

S. pardalis was found across multiple protected areas throughout its range (Broadley, 1989; Spawls et al., 2002; Baker et al., 2015). However, Kabigumila (1996 in: Vetter, 2005) found it to be more common

Stigmochelys pardalis outside protected areas than inside, potentially due to the protected areas being in less climatically- suitable regions. Spawls et al. (2002) documented that certain traditional beliefs also offered protection from local exploitation in parts of S. pardalis’ range.

Ethiopia: S. pardalis occurs in the southern and central areas of Ethiopia (Broadley, 1989; Iverson, 1992). Baker et al. (2015) reported higher numbers of S. pardalis in the Ethiopian highlands, compared with drier parts of its range (as fire is not a dominant component of the landscape). It has been reported that a giant form of S. pardalis exists in Ethiopia, reaching 100 cm in length (Fife, 2012). The species total population size in Ethiopia is unknown.

It was documented that small-sized S. pardalis are occasionally killed and eaten by pastoralists in southern Ethiopia, and their empty shells are manufactured into cowbells (P. J. Baker pers. comm. 2013 in: Baker et al., 2015). S. pardalis were reported to be traded from Ethiopia to East Africa and onwards into the global trade (Baker et al., 2015).

S. pardalis was reported to occur in multiple protected areas throughout its range in Ethiopia, including Awash National Park (NP), Mago NP, Nechisar NP, and Omo NP (Fife, 2012, P. J. Baker pers. comm. 2013, in: Baker et al., 2015). The species was not included within Ethiopia’s list of protected species (Council of Ministers, 2008).

The CITES Authorities of Ethiopia were consulted in August 2016 regarding status and management of S. pardalis in Ethiopia, but a response had not been received at the time of writing. References

Amir, O.G. 2007. Wildlife trade in Somalia. Wildlife Middle East, 1(4): 2. Baker, P.J., Kabigumila, J., Leuteritz, T., Hofmeyer, M. and Ngwava, J.M. 2015. Stigmochelys pardalis. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2016.1. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org. [Accessed: 21 June 2016]. Bartlett, R.D. and Bartlett, P. 2006. Turtles and tortoises (Complete pet owner’s manual). Barron’s Educational Series Inc., U.S., Hauppauge, New York. 96 pp. Bonin, F., Devaux, B. and Dupré, A. 2006. Turtles of the world. A&C Black, London (UK). 416 pp. Branch, B. 2008. Tortoises, terrapins and turtles of Africa. Struik Publishers Ltd, Cape Town, South Africa. 128 pp. Broadley, D.G. 1989. Geochelone pardalis, Leopard turtle. In: Swingland, I.R. and Klemens, M.W. (Eds.). The conservation biology of tortoises. Occasional papers of the IUCN Species Survival Commission. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland. 43–46. Buhlmann, K.A., Akre, T.S.B., Iverson, J.B., Karapatakis, D., Mittermeier, R.A., Georges, A., Rhodin, A.G.J., van Dijk, P.P. and Gibbons, J.W. 2009. A global analysis of tortoise and freshwater turtle distributions with identification of priority conservation areas. Chelonian Conservation and Biology, 8(2): 116–149. Council of Ministers 2008. Council of Ministers regulations to provide for wildlife development, conservation and utilization No. 163/2008. Ethiopia. 1–36 pp. Fife, R. 2012. In search of the giant Ethiopian leopard tortoise: would the tales of a race of larger-than-normal leopard tortoises be true? Available at: http://www.reptilesmagazine.com/Reptile-Magazines/Reptiles- Magazine/February-2012/Spotted-Spectacular/. [Accessed: 22 June 2016]. Fritz, U. and Bininda-Emonds, O.R.P. 2007. When genes meet nomenclature: tortoise phylogeny and the shifting generic concepts of Testudo and Geochelone. Zoology (Jena, Germany), 110(4): 298–307. Fritz, U., Daniels, S.R., Hofmeyr, M.D., González, J., Barrio-Amorós, C.L., Široký, P., Hundsdörfer, A.K. and Stuckas, H. 2010. Mitochondrial phylogeography and subspecies of the wide-ranging sub-Saharan leopard tortoise Stigmochelys pardalis (Testudines: Testudinidae) - a case study for the pitfalls of pseudogenes and GenBank sequences. Journal of Zoological Systematics and Evolutionary Research, 48(4): 348–359. Fritz, U. and Havaš, P. 2007. Checklist of chelonians of the world. Vertebrate Zoology, 57(2): 148–368. Hailey, A. and Coulson, I.M. 1995. Habitat association of the tortoises Geochelone pardalis and Kinixys spekii in the Sengwa-Wildlife-Research-Area, Zimbabwe. Herpetological Journal, 5(4): 305–309. Iverson, J.B. 1992. A revised checklist with distribution maps of the turtles of the world. Earlham College, Richmond, USA. 363 pp. Kabigumila, J. 1998. Community attitudes to tortoises (Geochelone pardalis babcocki) and their conservation in northern Tanzania. African Study Monographs, 19(4): 201–216. Kabigumila, J. 1996. Conservation biology of the tropical leopard tortoise (Geochelone pardalis babocki Loveridge) in Tanzania. In: SOPTOM (Ed.). Proceedings of the International Congress of Chelonian Conservation. Editions SOPTOM, Gonfaron, France. 123–126.

Stigmochelys pardalis

Le, M., Raxworthy, C.J., McCord, W.P. and Mertz, L. 2006. A molecular phylogeny of tortoises (Testudines: Testudinidae) based on mitochondrial and nuclear genes. Molecular Phylogenetics and Evolution, 40(2): 517– 531. Loveridge, A. and Williams, E.E. 1957. Revision of the African tortoises and turtles of the Suborder Cryptodira. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology, 115(6): 163–577. Malonza, P.K., Wasonga, V.D., Muchai, V., Rotich, D., Bwong, B.A. and Bauer, A.M. 2006. Diversity and biogeography of herpetofauna of the Tana River Primate National Reserve, Kenya. Journal of East African Natural History, 95(2): 95–109. Mason, M.C., Kerley, G.I.H., Weatherby, C.A. and Branch, W.R. 2000. Angulate and leopard tortoises in the Thicket Biome, Eastern Cape, South Africa: populations and biomass estimates. African Journal of Ecology, 38: 147–153. McDougal, J. 2000. Conservation of tortoises and terrestrial turtles. In: Klemens, M.W. (Ed.). Turtle conservation. Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC. 180–206. McMaster, M.K. and Downs, C.T. 2009. Home range and daily movement of leopard tortoises (Stigmochelys pardalis) in the Nama-Karoo, South Africa. Journal of Herpetology, 43(4): 561–569. McMaster, M.K. and Downs, C.T. 2006. Population structure and density of leopard tortoises (Geochelone pardalis) on farmland in the Nama-Karoo. Journal of Herpetology, 40(4): 495–502. Pritchard, P.C.H. 1979. Encyclopedia of turtles. TFH Publishing Inc., Neptune, USA. 859 pp. Spawls, S., Howell, K., Drewes, R. and Ashe, J. 2002. A field guide to the reptiles of East Africa. Academic Press, New York, USA. 543 pp. UNEP-WCMC, IUCN/SSC and TRAFFIC 1999. Review of significant trade in animal species included in CITES Appendix II: Detailed reviews of 37 species. World Conservation Monitoring Centre, IUCN Species Survival Commission and TRAFFIC Network, Cambridge, UK. UNEP-WCMC. 2014.Review of Stigmochelys pardalis from Mozambique and Zambia (sources F and R). UNEP- WCMC, Cambridge Vetter, H. 2005. Leopard- and African spurred tortoise: Stigmochelys Pardalis and Centrochelys Sulcata. Chelonian library. Edition Chimaira. 192 pp.

Pelochelys signifera

REPTILIA: TRIONYCHIDAE Pelochelys signifera II/B

COMMON NAMES: Northern New Guinea Giant Softshell Turtle (EN)

RANGE STATES: Indonesia, Papua New Guinea

UNDER REVIEW: Indonesia

EU DECISIONS: None

IUCN: Not assessed

Taxonomic note

Webb (2002) recognised Pelochelys signifera as a distinct species, separating the Pelochelys population in northern New Guinea from the more widely-distributed south-east Asian species Pelochelys cantorii; this reference was adopted at CITES CoP13 in 2004. Georges and Thomson (2010) noted that the relationship of P. signifera to and distinction from P. cantorii and P. bibroni (southern New Guinea) required further investigation. All three Pelochelys species are included in the current CITES Standard Reference for chelonians (Fritz and Havaš, 2007). Trade patterns

Pelochelys signifera was listed in Appendix II on 13/02/2003 and in Annex B of the EU Wildlife Trade Regulations on 30/08/2003 as part of the genus listing for Pelochelys spp.

Indonesia has submitted annual reports for the years 2006-2014, but has not yet submitted an annual report for 2015. Indonesia has published annual export quotas for P. signifera each year 2010-2016, with a quota of 36 live individuals per year 2010-2015 (maximum carapace length of 15 cm 2010-2011), increasing to 450 live individuals in 2016 (Table 1). It appears that trade has remained within quota.

Table 1: CITES export quotas for live Pelochelys signifera from Indonesia, 2006-2016, and global direct exports as reported by the countries of import and Indonesia 2006- 2015. No trade was reported 2006-2010 or 2015.

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Quota - - - - 36 36 36 36 36 36 450 Reported by importers ------4 - - - Reported by Indonesia - - - - - 15 22 2 18 - Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 10/08/2016.

There were no direct exports of P. signifera from Indonesia to the EU-28 2006-2015. Direct trade in P. signifera from Indonesia to countries other than the EU-28 2006-2015 comprised 57 live, wild-sourced individuals exported for commercial purposes 2011-2014, as reported by Indonesia (Table 1).

No indirect exports of P. signifera to the EU-28 originating from Indonesia were reported 2006-2015.

Pelochelys signifera

P. signifera was reported to closely resemble P. cantorii, from which it split at CoP13 in 2004 and for which there has been a 4.6(b) EU import suspension in place since 01/10/2007. The EU-28 has not reported any imports of P. cantorii from Indonesia 2006-2015, although there remains a low level of trade in live, wild-sourced P. cantorii from Indonesia to countries other than the EU-28 (Table 2).

Table 2: Direct exports of Pelochelys cantorii from Indonesia to the EU-28 (EU) and the rest of the world (RoW), 2006-2015. All trade was in live wild-sourced individuals for commercial purposes. (P. signifera was recognised as a species distinct from P. cantorii following CITES CoP13 in 2004).

Importer Reported by 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total EU Importer Exporter 6 17 9 32 RoW Importer 2 11 1 2 1 17 Exporter 58 104 76 56 45 28 19 34 420 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 18/08/2016. Conservation status

Pelochelys signifera is a giant soft-shell freshwater turtle that is endemic to the northern lowlands of the island of New Guinea, occurring in both Papua New Guinea and Indonesia (Webb, 2002; Georges and Thomson, 2010). Although little information was found to be available on the biology, ecology or status of P. signifera in the wild, it was reported to closely resemble P. cantorii (Webb, 2002); P. cantorii was documented to reach 60-100 cm in total carapace length and produce clutches of 24-70 eggs (Das, 2008). Given that P. signifera is a range-restricted island endemic and that many turtle species have slow maturation rates and low fecundity, it may be particularly vulnerable to overexploitation (e.g. Congdon et al., 1993 in: Lyons 2013).

The conservation status of the species has not been individually assessed by the IUCN, however, distribution and taxonomic information indicated that it was included under the (now outdated) assessment of Pelochelys cantorii (Asian Turtle Trade Working Group, 2016). P. cantorii was categorised as Endangered as it is “threatened over much of its range due to direct exploitation and habitat loss” (Asian Turtle Trade Working Group, 2016). Following a workshop on the conservation of Asia’s tortoises and freshwater turtles in 2011, Horne et al. (2012) recommended that Pelochelys cantorii and P. bibroni be uplisted to CITES Appendix I, as they were believed to be “unsustainably traded internationally as a result of widespread illegal collection and trade”. It was also proposed that the Red List status of P. cantorii be uplisted from Endangered to Critically Endangered (Horne et al., 2012); P. signifera was not mentioned specifically in this report and it was not clear whether this New Guinea endemic was still considered under P. cantorii.

Asian freshwater turtles are experiencing significant population declines due to high levels of harvesting for local food sources, and for the international trade in pets and Traditional Chinese Medicine (Gibbons et al., 2000; van Dijk et al., 2000; Shepherd and Nijman, 2007; Horne et al., 2012). Soft-shell turtles in particular were reported to be the preferred species for food consumption, and comprise the greatest proportion of known trade volumes (van Dijk et al., 2000; Horne et al., 2012). It has been reported that the demand for turtles and tortoises for pets, food, and medicine is increasing with growing human populations and economic improvements in East and Southeast Asia (Samedi and Iskandar, 2000). Samedi and Iskandar (2000) predicted that these species would decline without further control of their trade. It was documented that due to the high costs involved in turtle farming, wild- caught individuals were frequently laundered through farms under the pretence of being captive-bred (Nijman and Shepherd, 2009; Vinke and Vinke, 2010 in: Lyons, 2013). Habitat degradation and loss has been reported as a further key threat to Asian freshwater turtles (Das, 1997; Moll and Moll, 2004; Gibbons et al., 2000; van Dijk et al., 2000 in: Lyons 2013).

Pelochelys signifera

Indonesia: P. signifera was reported to range across the northern regions of Papua and West Papua, from the border with Papua New Guinea, westwards to Wanggar River (Nabire region, southern shore of Cenderawasih Bay) in West Papua (Rhodin and Genorupa, 2000 in: Webb, 2002; Fritz and Havaš, 2007). Although the current status of the population is unknown, it was described as rare in Indonesia (under P. cantorii) (Samedi and Iskandar, 2000).

The harvest of soft-shell turtles for food and the pet trade has been recorded as especially prevalent in Indonesia (Rhodin and Genorupa, 2000; Natusch and Lyons, 2012; Nijman et al., 2012; Lyons 2013; Horne et al., 2012), with the international pet trade documented as being highly unregulated (Sharma, 1999 in: Gibbons et al., 2000; Shepherd and Nijman, 2007; Horne et al., 2012; Nijman et al., 2012; Natusch and Lyons, 2012).

The island of New Guinea has the highest diversity of freshwater turtles in the Australasian region (Allison, 2006; Rhodin and Genorupa, 2000). Many of the species collected for the freshwater turtle pet trade originate from the remote regions of Indonesian New Guinea (Yuwono, 1998; Rhodin and Genorupa, 2000; Lyons et al., 2013), where there is little knowledge about their status in the wild (Natusch and Lyons, 2012). Where there are data available, it is suspected that the pet trade may already be a significant threat to freshwater turtles in this region (Rhodin and Genorupa, 2000; Natusch and Lyons, 2012; Lyons 2013). Nevertheless, a survey of reptile traders in the Indonesian provinces of Maluku, West Papua, and Papua did not identify any trade in P. signifera, despite it being one of the 21 species that had been allocated harvest quotas in that year (Natusch and Lyons, 2012).

P. signifera is not protected in Indonesia under Regulation No. 7 – 1999 (Republic of Indonesia, 1999). However, Indonesian national legislation stipulates that all trade in native non-protected species is regulated by a harvest and export quota system (Shepherd and Nijman, 2007). National quotas and regional sub-quotas are set annually at a meeting between the CITES Scientific Authority (the Indonesian Institute of Sciences, LIPI), the CITES Management Authority (the Directorate General of Forest Protection and Nature Conservation, PHKA), non-government organisations and traders (Shepherd and Nijman, 2007; Natusch and Lyons, 2012). Only those species that have an allotted harvest quota can be harvested from the wild for local sale or export, and these quotas only allow harvest from each designated province (Natusch and Lyons, 2012). However, it was noted that harvest quotas were “inadequately monitored and enforced” in Indonesia due to low levels of human resources and funding (Lee et al., 2005; Shepherd and Nijman, 2007).

The CITES Authorities of Indonesia were consulted in July 2016 regarding status and management of P. signifera in Indonesia, but a response had not been received at the time of writing. References

Allison, A. 2006. Reptiles and amphibians of the Trans-Fly region, New Guinea. Pacific Biological Survey. 51 pp. Asian Turtle Trade Working Group 2016. Pelochelys cantorii. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2016.1. Available at: www.iucnredlist.org. [Accessed: 22 June 2016]. Congdon, J.D., Dunham, A.E. and van Loben Sels, R.C. 1993. Delayed sexual maturity and demographics of Blanding’s turtles (Emydoidea blandingii): Implications for conservation and management of long-lived organisms. Conservation Biology, 7(4): 826–833. Das, I. 1997. Conservation problems of tropical Asia’s most threatened turtles. In: Abbema, J. (Ed.). Proceedings: Conservation, restoration and turtles: An international conference. New York Turtle and Tortoise Society and Wildlife Conservation Society Turtle Recovery Program, New York, USA. 295–300. Das, I. 2008. Pelochelys cantorii Gray 1864 - Asian giant softshell turtle. In: Rhodin, A.G.L., Pritchard, P.C.H., van Dijk, P.P., Saumure, R.A., Buhlmann, K.A. and Iverson, J.B. (Eds.). Conservation biology of freshwater turtles and tortoises: A compilation project of the IUCN/SSC Tortoise and Freshwater Turtle Specialist Group. Chelonian Research Monographs No. 5., Chelonian Research Foundation. 011.1–011.6. van Dijk, P.P., Stuart, B.L. and Rhodin, A.G.J. (Eds.) 2000. Executive summary. In: Asian turtle trade: Proceedings of a workshop on conservation and trade of freshwater turtles and tortoises in Asia. Chelonian Research Monographs No. 2., Chelonian Research Foundation, Lunenburg, Massachusetts, USA. 13–15. Fritz, U. and Havaš, P. 2007. Checklist of chelonians of the world. Vertebrate Zoology, 57(2): 148–368.

Pelochelys signifera

Georges, A. and Thomson, S. 2010. Diversity of Australasian freshwater turtles, with an annotated synonymy and keys to species. Zootaxa, 37(2496): 1–37. Gibbons, J.W., Scott, D.E., Ryan, T.J., Buhlmann, K.A., Tuberville, T.D., Metts, B.S., Green, J.L., Mills, T., Leiden, Y., Poppy, S. et al. 2000. The global decline of reptiles, deja vu amphibians. BioScience, 50(8): 653–666. Horne, B.D., Poole, C. and Walde, A.D. 2012. Conservation of Asian tortoises and freshwater turtles: Setting priorities for the next ten years. Recommendations and conclusions from the workshop in Singapore, February 21-24, 2011. Wildlife Conservation Society Singapore Ltd, Singapore. 28 pp. Lee, R.J., Gorog, A.J., Dwiyahreni, A., Siwu, S., Riley, J., Alexander, H., Paoli, G.D. and Ramono, W. 2005. Wildlife trade and implications for law enforcement in Indonesia: a case study from north Sulawesi. Biological Conservation, 123: 477–488. Lyons, J.A., Natusch, D.J.D. and Shepherd, C.R. 2013. The harvest of freshwater turtles (Chelidae) from Papua, Indonesia, for the international pet trade. Oryx, 47(02): 298–302. Moll, D. and Moll, E.O. 2004. The ecology, exploitation, and conservation of river turtles. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK. 420 pp. Natusch, D.J.D. and Lyons, J.A. 2012. Exploited for pets: the harvest and trade of amphibians and reptiles from Indonesian New Guinea. Biodiversity and Conservation, 21: 2899–2911. Nijman, V. and Shepherd, C.R. 2009. Wildlife trade from ASEAN to the EU: Issues with the trade in captive-bred reptiles from Indonesia. TRAFFIC Europe Report for the European Commission, Brussels, Belgium. Nijman, V., Shepherd, C.R., Sanders, K.L. and Sanders, M. 2012. Over-exploitation and illegal trade of reptiles in Indonesia. Herpetological Journal, 22: 83–89. Republic of Indonesia 1999. Indonesian Government Regulation No. 7 concerning the preservation of wild plants and animals. Peraturan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia, Indonesia. Rhodin, A.G.J.J. and Genorupa, V.R. 2000. Conservation status of freshwater turtles in Papua New Guinea. In: van Dijk, P.P., Stuart, B.L. and Rhodin, A.G.J. (Eds.). Asian turtle trade: proceedings of a workshop on conservation and trade of freshwater turtles and tortoises in Asia. Chelonian Research Monogronographs, No. 2., Chelonian Research Foundation, Lunenburg, Massachusetts, USA. 129–136. Samedi and Iskandar, D.T. 2000. Freshwater turtle and tortoise conservation and utilization in Indonesia. In: van Dijk, P.P., Stuart, B.L. and Rhodin, A.G.J. (Eds.). Asian turtle trade: proceedings of a workshop on conservation and trade of freshwater turtles and tortoises in Asia. Chelonian Research Monographs 2. Chelonian Research Foundation, Lunenburg, Massachusetts, USA. 106–111. Sharma, D.S.K. 1999. Tortoise and freshwater turtle trade and utilisation in Peninsular Malaysia. A TRAFFIC Southeast Asia Report. TRAFFIC Southeast Asia Field Report No 15. Unpublished., Petaling Jaya, Selangor (Malaysia). 39 pp. Shepherd, C.R. and Nijman, V. 2007. An overview of the regulation of the freshwater turtle and tortoise pet trade in Jakarta, Indonesia. TRAFFIC Southeast Asia, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia. 62 pp. Vinke, T. and Vinke, S. 2010. Do breeding facilities for chelonians threaten their stability in the wild? Schildkröten im Fokus Online Bergheim, 1: 1–18. Webb, R.G. 2002. Observations on the Giant softshell turtle, Pelochelys cantorii, with description of a new species. Hamadryad, 27(1): 99–107. Yuwono, F.B. 1998. The trade of live reptiles in Indonesia. In: Erdelen, W. (Ed.). Conservation, trade and sustainable use of lizards and snakes in Indonesia. Mertensiella 9. Deutsche gesellschaft für herpetologie und terrarienkunde e. V. Rheinbach, Germany. 9–15.

Corals from Malaysia (Sarawak)

Corals from Malaysia (Sarawak) – Overview of status, management and trade

In 2016, new quotas were published for 54 genera and nine species for Malaysia (Sarawak). This section provides an overview of trade in these taxa from Malaysia over the period 2006-2015, as well as background information on the status and trends of corals within Sarawak, the threats affecting corals, and management actions taken to ensure sustainability of the trade. Malaysian corals were previously reviewed UNEP-WCMC (2015) and this review draws on that report. Trade patterns

Malaysia has submitted annual reports for the years 2006-2014, but has not yet submitted an annual report for 2015. Malaysia published annual export quotas for corals for the first time in 2014, with a zero export quota for Anthozoa from Sabah. In 2015, Malaysia published new annual export quotas for 47 coral genera and six species, from Peninsular Malaysia and Sabah (An overview of status, management and trade of corals from Malaysia was produced for UNEP-WCMC, 2015. In 2016, Malaysia published quotas for 56 coral genera and nine species, including new quotas for 54 genera and nine species from Sarawak (Table 1). CITES Notification no. 2013/035 lists coral taxa where identification to genus level is acceptable; Malaysia published quotas for two genera (Euphyllia and Plerogyra) for which trade at the genus level is acceptable for dead specimens only. Data extracted from the CITES Trade Database does not distinguish between Peninsula Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak, hence whilst the focus of this review is the new quotas from Sarawak, trade data is analysed for the country as a whole.

Direct trade in the selected coral taxa to the EU-28 from Malaysia 2006-2015 mainly comprised very low quantities of wild-sourced live corals exported for commercial purposes (with no trade reported by EU- importers or Malaysia for 17 taxa) (Table 1). The only reported indirect trade to the EU-28 originating from Malaysia was for Scleractinia spp. (1500 kg live corals imported in 2014). Direct exports to countries other than the EU-28 mainly comprised low volumes of wild-sourced live corals exported for commercial purposes, with no trade reported for 14 taxa. However, trade levels were moderate or high for 15 taxa, (including Scleractinia spp., Acropora spp., Blastomussa spp., Cynarina lacrymalis, Euphyllia spp., Plerogyra spp. and Trachyphyllia geoffroyi), mainly as wild-sourced live corals for commercial purposes.

There was no trade reported in 2015 (and Malaysia’s 2015 annual report had not yet been received), hence it was not possible to evaluate whether quotas for 2015 were adhered to.

Corals from Malaysia (Sarawak)

Table 1: Overview of coral taxa (Anthozoa and Hydrozoa) for which new quotas were published for Sarawak in 2016, and direct trade from Malaysia to the EU-28 and the rest of the world 2006-2015. No trade was reported in 2015. All corals in the table are listed on CITES Appendix II. Direct trade4 from Malaysia 2006-2015 is split between trade to the EU-28 (EU) and trade to the rest of the world (R0W). If importer- and exporter-reported figures differ, both are given. Importer-reported figures are listed first, and exporter-reported figures are listed below [in grey font and in square brackets]. Only the main source and purpose for each listed term are provided sequentially in parentheses, except in cases where two sources or purposes are equally traded when both are given. If trade 2006-2015 involves fewer than 500 units, this is considered to be “Low” trade and details are given. If trade involves 500-1000 units, this is considered to be “Moderate”, and if trade involves more than 1000 units, this is considered to be “High”. If trade is considered to be moderate or high, and comprises a number of similarly traded terms, only the main terms and sources are indicated between brackets. All opinions refer to wild-sourced specimens unless otherwise indicated.

4 Scientific specimens and Purpose ‘S’ were excluded from the analysis

Corals from Malaysia (Sarawak)

EU Trade RoW Trade Taxon (No. of species in Date and details of Last Direct trade from Last CITES 2016 quotas for Sarawak Malaysia and their IUCN Direct trade from Malaysia EU opinion in Malaysia in (Malaysia) category) 2006-2015 trade 2006-2015 trade Caulastraea spp. No opinion ii), 1 live (W; T) 245 live (W; T), 8 raw corals (W; T) 650 live, wild-taken (not identifiable to 2013 2013 4 spp. – 2 VU, 1 NT, 1 LC) 27/06/2016 [2 live (W; T)] [180 live (W; T)] species level) - Sarawak Coscinaraea spp. No opinion ii), 450 live, wild-taken (not identifiable to - No trade - No trade (5 spp. – 3 LC, 2 NE) 27/06/2016 species level) - Sarawak Ctenactis spp. No opinion ii), 750 live, wild-taken (not identifiable to - No trade - No trade (3 spp. – 1 NT, 2 LC) 27/06/2016 species level) - Sarawak Cycloseris spp. No opinion ii), 650 live, wild-taken (not identifiable to - No trade - No trade (1 spp. – LC) 27/06/2016 species level) - Sarawak Cynarina lacrymalis No opinion ii), 2 live (W; T) High (inc. 885 live, W; T) 2014 2013 850 live, wild-taken - Sarawak (NT) 27/06/2016 [7 live (W; T)] [220 live (W; T)] Cyphastrea spp. No opinion ii), 650 live, wild-taken (not identifiable to 2013 2 live (W; T) 2009 50 live (W; T) (7 spp. – 2 VU, 5 LC) 27/06/2016 species level) - Sarawak Dendrophyllia spp. No opinion ii), 140 live (W; T) 950 live, wild-taken (not identifiable to 2014 [5 live (W; T)] 2013 (1 spp. – NE) 27/06/2016 [170 live (W; T)] species level) - Sarawak Diploastrea heliopora No opinion ii), 2013 2 live (W; T) - No trade 1200 live, wild-taken - Sarawak (NT) 27/06/2016 Echinophyllia spp. No opinion ii), 2 live (W; T) 352 live (W; T) 5000 live, wild-taken (not identifiable 2014 2012 (6 spp. – 5 LC, 1 NE) 27/06/2016 [7 live (W; T)] [100 live (W; T)] to species level) - Sarawak Echinopora spp. No opinion ii), 1650 live, wild-taken (not identifiable 2013 [2 live (W; T)] 2009 6 live (W; T) (6 spp. – 3 NT, 3 LC) 27/06/2016 to species level) - Sarawak Euphyllia spp., No 3200 live, wild-taken (not identifiable opinion ii), 27/06/2016 2014 6 live (W; T) to species level) – Sarawak Euphyllia spp. Euphyllia [16 live (W; T)] High (inc. 3429 live, W; T) (Note identification to the genus level 2013 (9 spp. – 5 VU, 3 NT, 1 NE) glabrescens, wild, [High (1600 live, W; T)] is only permitted for dead specimens, live: No opinion i), as per CITES Notification no. 07/11/2014 2013/035) Favia spp. No opinion ii), 227 live (W; T), 28 raw corals (R; T) 1350 live, wild-taken (not identifiable (15 spp. – 1 VU, 8 NT, 6 2013 2 live (W; T) 2014 27/06/2016 [270 live (W; T)] to species level) - Sarawak LC) Favites spp. No opinion ii), 241 live (W; T), 8 raw corals (W; T) 1250 live, wild-taken (not identifiable 2013 2 live (W; T) 2014 (11 spp. – 10 NT, 1 LC) 27/06/2016 [50 live (W; T)] to species level) - Sarawak 2580 live, wild-taken (not identifiable to species level) – Sarawak & Fungia spp. 1450 live, wild-taken (not identifiable No opinion ii), Moderate (inc. 593 live, W; T) (21 spp. – 1 NT, 11 LC, 9 2014 [7 live (W; T)] 2013 to species level), includes quota 27/06/2016 [Moderate (600 live, W; T)] NE) submitted for taxon (Diaseris spp.) not valid according to CITES Standard Nomenclature in Annex of Conf. 12.11 (Rev. CoP16) - Sarawak Galaxea spp. No opinion ii), 5 live (W; T) 111 live (W; T), 21 raw corals (R; T) 1250 live, wild-taken (not identifiable 2013 2013 (2 spp. – 1 VU, 1 NT) 27/06/2016 [6 live (W; T)] [40 live (W; T)] to species level) - Sarawak Gardineroseris spp. 1800 live, wild-taken (not identifiable - - No trade - No trade (1 spp. – LC) to species level) - Sarawak

Corals from Malaysia (Sarawak)

EU Trade RoW Trade Taxon (No. of species in Date and details of Last Direct trade from Last CITES 2016 quotas for Sarawak Malaysia and their IUCN Direct trade from Malaysia EU opinion in Malaysia in (Malaysia) category) 2006-2015 trade 2006-2015 trade Goniastrea spp. No opinion ii), 2500 live, wild-taken (not identifiable - No trade - No trade (8 spp. – 3 NT, 5 LC) 27/06/2016 to species level) - Sarawak Goniopora spp. No opinion ii), 1 live (W; T) Moderate (inc. 448 live, W; T) 2800 live, wild-taken (not identifiable (15 spp. – 1 VU, 5 NT, 9 2014 2013 27/06/2016 [7 live (W; T)] [337 live (W; T)] to species level) - Sarawak LC) Halomitra spp. - 2013 [2 live (W; T)] 2009 13 live (W; T) 1280 live, wild-taken - Sarawak (1 spp. – LC) Heliofungia spp. [7 live (W; T), 174 raw Moderate (inc. 397 live, W; T) - 2014 2013 1500 live, wild-taken - Sarawak (1 spp. – VU) corals (W; S)] [175 live (W; T)] Herpolitha spp. - - No trade 2010 6 live (I; P) 980 live, wild-taken - Sarawak (1 spp. – LC) Hydnophora spp. 1500 live, wild-taken (not identifiable - 2013 [2 live (W; T)] 2009 21 live (W; T), 3 raw corals (R; T) (4 spp. – 2 NT. 2 LC) to species level) - Sarawak Leptastrea spp. No opinion ii), 2 live (W; T) 550 live, wild-taken (not identifiable to 2014 2009 4 live (W; T/R; T) (5 spp. – 2 NT, 3 LC) 27/06/2016 [7 live (W; T)] species level) - Sarawak Leptoria phrygia, wild: Leptoria spp. 750 live, wild-taken (not identifiable to No opinion i), - No trade 2009 12 live (W; T), 7 raw corals (R; T) (2 spp. – 1 VU, 1 NT) species level) - Sarawak 02/12/2011 Leptoseris spp. No opinion ii), 750 live, wild-taken (not identifiable to 2013 [4 raw corals (W; T)] - No trade (11 spp. – 2 VU, 9 LC) 27/06/2016 species level) - Sarawak Lithophyllon spp. No opinion ii), 1100 live, wild-taken (not identifiable 2013 [2 live (W; T)] 2009 1 live (W; T) (3 spp. – 1 EN, 1 NT, 1 LC) 27/06/2016 to species level) - Sarawak Lobophyllia spp. No opinion ii), 2 live (W; T) Moderate (inc. 282 live, W; T) 1290 live, wild-taken (not identifiable 2014 2014 (6 spp. – 1 VU, 1 NT, 4 LC) 27/06/2016 [12 live (W; T)] [60 live (W; T)] to species level) - Sarawak Merulina spp. Merulina ampliata: No 2 live (W; T) 2013 2009 3 live (W; T) 850 live, wild-taken - Sarawak (2 spp. – 2 LC) opinion i), 02/12/2011 [2 live (W; T)] Montastrea spp. No opinion ii), 890 live, wild-taken (not identifiable to - No trade - No trade (6 spp. – 1 VU, 4 NT, 1 LC) 27/06/2016 species level) - Sarawak Montipora spp. No opinion ii), 1 live (W; T) 360 live (W; T), 5 raw corals (R; T) 1100 live, wild-taken (not identifiable (41 spp. – 15 VU, 10 NT, 14 2014 2013 27/06/2016 [12 live (W; T)] [228 live (W; T)] to species level) - Sarawak LC, 2 NE) Mycedium spp. - No trade 2009 3 raw corals (R; T) 750 live, wild-taken - Sarawak (5 spp. – 1 VU, 3 LC, 1 DD) Oxypora spp. No opinion ii), 440 live, wild-taken (not identifiable to - No trade 2008 10 live (R; T) (3spp. – 3 LC) 27/06/2016 species level) - Sarawak Pachyseris spp. No opinion ii), 1120 live, wild-taken (not identifiable - No trade 2012 [20 live (W; T)] (4 spp. – 1 VU, 1 NT, 2 LC) 27/06/2016 to species level) - Sarawak Pavona spp. No opinion ii), 20 live (W; T), 2 raw corals (R; T) 1250 live, wild-taken (not identifiable (13 spp. – 4 VU, 1 NT, 6 2013 [2 live (W; T)] 2014 27/06/2016 [9 live (W; T)] to species level) - Sarawak LC, 1 DD, 1 NE) 1 live (W; T) Pectinia spp. No opinion ii), 750 live, wild-taken (not identifiable to 2014 [7 live (W; T)] 2009 5 live (U; T), 14 raw corals (R; T) (5 spp. – 2 VU, 2 NT, 1 DD) 27/06/2016 species level) - Sarawak

Corals from Malaysia (Sarawak)

EU Trade RoW Trade Taxon (No. of species in Date and details of Last Direct trade from Last CITES 2016 quotas for Sarawak Malaysia and their IUCN Direct trade from Malaysia EU opinion in Malaysia in (Malaysia) category) 2006-2015 trade 2006-2015 trade 90 live (W; T), 6 raw corals (R; T) 2 live (W; T) Physogyra lichtensteini At genus level: 78 live (W; T), 32 raw - 2013 At genus level: [5 live (W; 2012 750 live, wild-taken - Sarawak (VU) corals (W; T) T)] [260 live (W; T)] Platygyra spp. No opinion ii), 27 live (R; T) 1350 live, wild-taken (not identifiable 2013 2 live (W; T) 2012 (10 spp. – 6 NT, 4 LC) 27/06/2016 [160 live (W; T)] to species level) - Sarawak Plerogyra spp., wild, raw corals: No opinion 1580 live, wild-taken (not identifiable i), 07/11/2014 to species level) – Sarawak Plerogyra sinuosa Plerogyra spp. 4 live (W; T) High (inc. 1556 live, W; T) (Note identification to the genus level wild, live: No opinion 2014 2013 (5 spp. – 2 NT, 3 DD) [16 live (W; T)] [Moderate (657 live, W; T)] is only permitted for dead specimens, i), 07/11/2014 as per CITES Notification no. Plerogyra turbida wild: 2013/035) No opinion ii), 27/06/2016 Pocillopora spp. No opinion ii), 2300 live, wild-taken (not identifiable - No trade 2013 No trade (6 spp. – 1 VU, 1 NT, 4 LC) 27/06/2016 to species level) - Sarawak Podabacia crustacea - - No trade - No trade 550 live, wild-taken - Sarawak (LC) 24 live (W; T) Polyphyllia talpina No opinion ii), 2013 2 live (W; T) 2012 [15 live (W; T)] 1150 live, wild-taken - Sarawak (LC) 27/06/2016 At genus level: 20 live (W; T)] Porites spp. No opinion ii), 60 live (W; T) 13 500 live, wild-taken (not identifiable (23 spp. – 2 EN, 4 VU, 6 - No trade 2008 27/06/2016 [38 live (W; T)] to species level) - Sarawak NT, 9 LC, 1 DD, 1 NE) Psammocora spp. No opinion ii), 600 live, wild-taken (not identifiable to - No trade - No trade (8 spp. – 2 NT, 5 LC, 1 DD) 27/06/2016 species level) - Sarawak Sandalolitha robusta No opinion i), - No trade - No trade 340 live, wild-taken - Sarawak (LC) 02/12/2011 Scolymia spp. No opinion ii), 2 live (W; T) 258 live (W; T), 16 raw corals (W; T) 650 live, wild-taken (not identifiable to 2014 2012 (2 spp. – 1 NT, 1 LC) 27/06/2016 [7 live (W; T)] [51 live (W; T)] species level) - Sarawak Seriatopora spp. No opinion ii), 60 live (R; T) 13 900 live, wild-taken (not identifiable 2013 2 live (W; T) 2010 (2 spp. – 1 NT, 1 LC) 27/06/2016 [20 live (W; T)] to species level) - Sarawak Siderastrea spp. No opinion ii), 1300 live, wild-taken (not identifiable - No trade - No trade (1 spp. – LC) 27/06/2016 to species level) - Sarawak Stylophora spp. No opinion ii), 1200 live, wild-taken (not identifiable 2013 5 live (W; T) - No trade (3 spp. – 1 NT, 1 LC, 1 NE) 27/06/2016 to species level) - Sarawak Symphyllia spp. No opinion ii), 2 live (W; T) 107 live (W; T) 1850 live, wild-taken (not identifiable 2014 2012 (5 spp. – 1 VU, 4 LC) 27/06/2016 [7 live (W; T)] [20 live (W; T)] to species level) - Sarawak 2 live (W; T) High (inc. 1155 live, W; T) Trachyphyllia geoffroyi No opinion ii), 2013 At genus level: [5 live (W; 2012 [205 live (W; T)] 850 live, wild-taken - Sarawak (NT) 27/06/2016 T)] At genus level: [180 live (W; T)] Tubastraea spp. No opinion ii), 650 live, wild-taken (not identifiable to 2013 2 live (W; T) 2012 443 live (W; T), 43 raw corals (R; T) (3 spp. – 3 NE) 27/06/2016 species level) - Sarawak

Corals from Malaysia (Sarawak)

Status and trends

Located within the Coral Triangle of Southeast Asia, the coastal waters of Malaysia are comprised of highly diverse coral reefs (Tun et al., 2008). Fringing and patch atolls cover 4006 km2 (Tun et al., 2008) of the 453 186 km2 economic zone of Malaysian waters (Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Malaysia, 2014). Malaysia itself is separated into two geographically distinct areas: Peninsular Malaysia and East Malaysia on the island of Borneo, composed of Sabah and Sarawak. Sarawak has approximately 25% of the coastline of Malaysia (Asian Development Bank, 2014) but has a low proportion of the country’s coral reefs due to high sedimentation in coastal waters (Burke et al., 2002). Sarawak’s reefs are found on the offshore islands to the northeast and southeast of the state (Asian Development Bank, 2014); Sarawak’s Miri reef has been considered one of the largest and most pristine in Southeast Asia (Hiew et al., 2012).

No comprehensive surveys of coral reef biodiversity were reported to have been conducted throughout Malaysia (Wilkinson et al., 2006; Sea Resources Management, 2010). However, the Asian Development Bank (2014) compiled records from several sources which estimate in excess of 550 coral species in East Malaysia (Asian Development Bank, 2014). Over 200 species of hard coral (Scleractinia spp.) have been reported in the Miri-Sibuti area, with over 60 genera represented (Fenner, 2013). Over 95% of corals on Miri reefs were reported to be zooxanthellate Scleractinia [i.e. symbiotic with single-celled zooxanthella] (Fenner, 2013).

With regards to live coral coverage (LCC), Reef Check Malaysia’s (2015) ninth annual survey documented a relatively high LCC of 45.7% and 69.7% in the two Sarawak survey sites (Miri and Kuching, with an average LCC of 57.7%), indicating a ‘fair’ to ‘good’ condition of health. This represents a slight decrease since 2014 for Miri (6.4%) but a 14% increase for Kuching; however, neither have recovered to their 2013 LCC levels of 53.1% and 75.7% respectively (Reef Check Malaysia, 2013). Although diversity and abundance of fish and invertebrates is higher in East Malaysia, reefs in Peninsular Malaysia were considered to be in ‘better condition’ (Reef Check Malaysia, 2015). Threats Over 85% of Malaysian reefs were reported to remain under threat (Burke et al., 2002; Chou et al., 2002), stemming from a combination of natural processes and, more predominately, anthropogenic influences (Mazlan et al., 2005; Asian Development Bank, 2014). Destructive fishing and coastal pollution via sedimentation were considered the most significant and immediate threats to Malaysian reefs (Sea Resources Management, 2010), impacting 68% and 56% of reefs, respectively (Burke et al., 2002; Chou et al., 2002). Coral reefs in Sarawak were reported to be particularly threatened by high sedimentation, sand mining and nutrient runoff (Pilcher & Cabanban, 2000; Praveena et al., 2012); Sarawak’s Miri reefs were reported to be threatened by pollution and sediments from the Miri and Baram rivers in 2000 (Pilcher and Cabanban, 2000). In 2015, Reef Check Malaysia (2015) reported visible impacts from warm water bleaching, physical anchor damage and pollution with discarded fishing gear at Sarawak’s Miri and Kuching survey sites.

The 1998 bleaching event marked the first significant mass coral reef bleaching within Malaysia (Harborne et al., 2000; Reef Check Malaysia, 2014), although Fenner (2013) reported that the effect on Sarawak’s Miri reef appeared to be minimal. Coral die-off as a result of the less severe 2010 bleaching event on Sarawak corals was reported to be unknown (Tun et al., 2010).

Coastal development has been reported to threaten 45% of reefs in Sarawak (Burke et al., 2002). Tourism has also been highlighted as a threat to Malaysian reefs (Wilkinson et al., 2006; Reef Check Malaysia, 2014), although for Sabah and Sarawak tourist impacts were rated as “very low concentration” (Asian Development Bank, 2014). Natural impacts, such as storms and disease, have also been recorded to have a

Corals from Malaysia (Sarawak) limited, localised effect on Malaysian corals. Wilkinson et al. (2006) stressed that, whilst in isolation, natural events rarely cause damage which reefs cannot recover from, an increase in the frequency and intensity of such events can have a permanent effect (Wilkinson et al., 2006). Sea Resources Management (2010) considered ocean acidification and global warming as the most significant future threats to Malaysian reefs. Protection and management Regulatory background Within Malaysia the Ministry of Natural Resources is the lead authority for environmental management (Tun et al., 2004; NOAA, 2011). Coral reef management and conservation were reported to be under the jurisdiction of the Sarawak and Sabah Parks and the Department of Fisheries (DoF) in Eastern Malaysia (Tun et al., 2004). The management of coral reefs was reported to fall under State regulations (up to three nautical miles off shore) and federal government jurisdiction (up to 200 nautical miles off shore) (Pilcher and Cabanban, 2000; Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Malaysia, 2012).

According to Sarawak’s Wild Life Protection Ordinance (1998), all species of Hydrozoa and Anthozoa are listed as ‘Protected Animals’; animals other than ‘Totally Protected Animals’ may be imported or exported under licence. Corals (Antipatharia spp., Helioporidae spp., Scleractinia spp. and Tubiporidae spp.) are also scheduled species on Malaysia’s International Trade in Endangered Species Act (2008), meaning a permit is required for export.

Relevant legislation for the protection and management of corals includes the Malaysian Fisheries Act of 1985 (Act 317); section 41 requires the establishment of marine parks or marine reserves via the designation of an area or part of an area in Malaysian fisheries waters.

Lack of resources and insufficient harmonisation between different departments were considered to be limiting factors in the effectiveness of coral reef conservation (Pilcher and Cabanban, 2000; Asian Development Bank, 2014), and the “inefficient” regulatory system was thought to leave the Malaysian reefs “open to almost unlimited exploitation and destruction” (Sea Resources Management, 2010). However, the Malaysian National Action Plan for the Coral Triangle Initiative emphasised sustainable trade in reef- based ornamentals, and the improvement of the status of coral species (Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Malaysia, 2009). Protected areas An estimated 1.4% of Malaysia’s territorial waters are designated as protected areas (Reef Check Malaysia 2014). Tun et al. (2008) reported 43 of the 83 actively managed marine protected areas (MPAs) contain coral reefs, 16% of which were reported to have a good management rating. Sarawak has seven MPAs, with a number of further MPAs proposed (Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Malaysia, 2014), which are managed by the Sarawak Forestry Corporation (Asian Development Bank, 2014); three of these MPAs were established to protect coral reefs (Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Malaysia, 2014). The effectiveness of MPAs management was reported to vary between marine parks with difficulties in enforcement of regulations and monitoring the status of Malaysian coral reefs highlighted (Burke et al., 2002). Ineffective management of marine ecosystems, with limited numbers of MPAs and inadequate enforcement and monitoring were highlighted as threats to reefs in Malaysia (Reef Check Malaysia, 2014). However, live coral cover was reported to be higher inside protected areas than outside (Reef Check Malaysia, 2015). The collection of corals, anchoring and trawling were reported to be prohibited within Malaysian marine parks (Reef Check Malaysia, 2011). Malaysia has been committed to the Coral Triangle Initiative since 2009, with the aims of implementation, establishment and management of ‘marine parks, sustainable fisheries, marine enforcement and

Corals from Malaysia (Sarawak) awareness building’ (Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Malaysia, 2014). Efforts have been focused mainly upon the coasts of Sabah (Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Malaysia, 2014). Coral reef management actions Tun et al. (2008) reported that the country’s coral reef monitoring program was coordinated by several agencies within different geographical areas. In Eastern Malaysia, the Sarawak DoF monitors reefs located within Northeast and Southeast Sarawak (Tun et al., 2008). Tun et al. (2008) reported that, whilst data from 8 years of coral reef monitoring is substantial, there is no central coordination to archive and analyse data and is instead managed independently by various organisations and institutions. The Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Malaysia (2014) reported that, since 2010, the Department of Marine Parks Malaysia has created closer collaboration with local communities in consultation and education on alternative livelihoods and with NGO’s and local universities for improved research and monitoring.

Following the 1998 bleaching event, Malaysia developed the Coral Reef Bleaching Response Plan with the aim to develop and implement appropriate responses to such events. This plan includes four primary components to achieve this: early warning systems, response triggers, management actions and communication with stakeholders (Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Malaysia, 2014).

Mariculture Malaysia’s efforts for mariculture were presented at an international workshop in 2011 (NOAA, 2011). At the time of the workshop, Malaysia had developed draft guidelines for stony coral mariculture which were under review by the government. The guidelines were considered ‘restrictive’, allowing for only one commercial company to conduct stony coral mariculture. It was reported that it was therefore unlikely for mariculture activities to expand within Malaysia (NOAA, 2011); as of 2011 there was one coral mariculture business in Malaysia, located on Sabah’s northeast coast (NOAA, 2011).

Regulation of trade The Malaysian Scientific Authority (SA) and Management Authority (MA) were previously consulted regarding management of coral harvesting within the country. Coral quotas were reported to be based on a Non-Detriment Finding (NDF) report conducted by the Fisheries Research Institute of Malaysia (the Scientific Authority for Corals, Seahorses and Sea Anemones) (Malaysian CITES MA pers. comm. to UNEP-WCMC, 2015). The proposed harvest quotas were reported to have been evaluated and adopted by the Department of Fisheries (DoF), the Malaysian CITES Committee and the Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Malaysia (Malaysian CITES MA pers. comm. to UNEP-WCMC, 2015).

Harvested corals were reported to require a height/diameter between 5 cm and 25 cm, five per cent of harvested corals required to be reintroduced into the wild (Malaysian CITES MA pers. comm. to UNEP- WCMC, 2015).

Two collection sites were reported to exist in Malaysia in 2015, neither of which were in Sarawak (Malaysian CITES MA pers. comm. to UNEP-WCMC, 2015). Harvest areas were reportedly located outside of marine protected areas and marine parks and designated by the respective State Authorities; the DoF was noted to further assess the sites to ensure sustainable coral harvest activities. The DoF was reported to have developed a Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for Coral Propagation Monitoring to ensure the sustainable exploitation of corals in international trade and to protect and conserve Malaysian coral reefs so as prevent extinction as a result of uncontrolled harvesting (Malaysian CITES MA pers. comm. to UNEP-WCMC, 2015).

The Malaysian MA reported that the permitted export of wild-sourced corals will cease within five years (Malaysian CITES MA pers. comm. to UNEP-WCMC, 2015). The Malaysian CITES MA (pers. comm. to UNEP-WCMC, 2015) noted that as of 31 August 2015, no illegal trade in corals had been reported or recorded in the country.

Corals from Malaysia (Sarawak)

The Malaysian CITES Authorities were contacted again in August 2016 to request further information on coral status, management and harvesting in Sarawak. No reply had been received at the time of writing. References

Asian Development Bank 2014. State of the Coral Triangle: Malaysia. Mandaluyong City, Philippines. 127 pp. Burke, L., Selig, E. and Spalding, M.D. 2002. Reefs at risk in Southeast Asia. World Resources Institute, Washington D.C., USA. 76 pp. Chou, L.M., Tuan, V.S., Yeemin, T., Cabanban, Suharsono and Kessna, I. 2002. Status of southeast Asian coral reefs. In: Wilkinson, C. (Ed.). Status of Coral Reefs of the World 2002. Australian Institute of Marine Sciences, Townsville, Australia. 123–152. Fenner, D. 2013. Reef corals of Miri area reefs, Sarawak, Malaysia. PhD thesis. 16 pp. Harborne, A., Fenner, D., Barnes, A., Beger, M., Harding, S. and Roxburgh, T. 2000. Status report on the coral reefs of the east coast of Peninsular Malaysia. Coral Cay Conservation Ltd., London, UK. 89 pp. Hiew, K., Saad, J. and Gopinath, N. 2012. Coral Triangle Initiative: Ecosystem Approach to Fisheries Management (EAFM): Country Position Paper — Malaysia. The USAID Coral Triangle Support Partnership, Honolulu, Hawaii. 60 pp. Malaysian CITES Management Authority. Fazilah Mohd. Zaini (Ministry of Natural resources and Environment, Malaysia) pers. comm. to UNEP-WCMC, 24 September 2015 Mazlan, A.G., Zaidi, C.C., Wan-Lotfi, W.M. and Othman, B.H.R. 2005. On the current status of coastal marine biodiversity in Malaysia. Indian Journal of Marine Sciences, 34(1): 76–87. Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment, Malaysia 2014. Malaysia’s Fifth National Report to the Convention on Biological Diversity. Ministry of Natural Resources and Environment Malaysia, Putrajaya, Malaysia. 99 pp. Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Malaysia 2009. Malaysia draft national plan of action. Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation, Putrajaya, Malaysia. 56 pp. Ministry of Science Technology and Innovation Malaysia 2012. State of the Coral Triangle report highlights: Malaysia. Coral Triangle Initiative. 1-4 pp. NOAA, 2011. Country Profile: Malaysia. In: International Workshop on the Trade in Coral Reef Species: Development of International Guidelines for Environmentally Friendly Coral Mariculture. 12-15 July 2011. Bali, Indonesia. Pilcher, N. and Cabanban, A. 2000. The status of coral reefs in Eastern Malaysia. Kota Samarahan, Sarawak and Kota Kinabalu, Sabah. 63 pp. Praveena, S.M., Siraj, S.S. and Aris, A.Z. 2012. Coral reefs studies and threats in Malaysia: A mini review. Reviews in Environmental Science and Biotechnology, 11: 27–39. Reef Check Malaysia 2011. Status of coral reefs in Malaysia 2011. Reef Check Malaysia, Kuala Lumpar, Malaysia. 37 pp. Reef Check Malaysia 2013. Status of Coral Reefs in Malaysia, 2013. Reef Check Malaysia, Kuala Lumpar, Malaysia. 66 pp. Reef Check Malaysia 2014. Status of Coral Reefs in Malaysia, 2014. Reef Check Malaysia, Kuala Lumpar, Malaysia. 72 pp. Reef Check Malaysia 2015. Status of Coral Reefs in Malaysia, 2015. Reef Check Malaysia, Kuala Lumpar, Malaysia. 95 pp. Sea Resources Management 2010. Malaysia Ocean Policy (2011-2020) - State of the marine environment report (SOMER). Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MOSTI), Selangor, Malaysia. 313 pp. Tun, K., Chou, L.M., Cabanban, A., Tuan, V.S., Yeemin, T., Suharsono, Sour, K. and Lane, D. 2004. Status of Coral Reefs, Coral Reef Monitoring and Management in Southeast Asia, 2004. In: Wilkinson, C. (Ed.). Status of Coral Reefs of the World: 2004 - Volume 1. Australian Institute of Marine Science, Queensland, Australia. 235–276. Tun, K., Chou, L.M., Low, J., Yeemin, T., Phongsuwan, N., Setiasih, N., Wilson, J., Amri, A.Y., Adzis, K.A.A., Lane, D. et al. 2010. A regional overview on the 2010 coral bleaching event in southeast Asia. In: Japan, M. of the E. (Ed.). Status of coral reefs in East Asian Seas Region: 2010. Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network, Tokyo, Japan. 9– 27. Tun, K., Ming, C.L., Yeemin, T., Phongsuwan, N., Amri, A.Y., Ho, N., Sour, K., van Long, N., Nanola, C., Lane, D. et al. 2008. Status of Coral Reefs in South-East Asia. In: Wilkinson, C. (Ed.). Status of Coral Reefs of the World: 2008. Global Coral Reef Monitoring Network and Reef and Rainforest Research Centre, Townsville, Australia. 131–144. UNEP-WCMC. 2015. Review of species selected on the basis of the Analysis of 2015 CITES export quotas. UNEP- WCMC, Cambridge. Wilkinson, C., Souter, D. and Goldberg, J. 2006. Status of coral reefs in tsunami affected countries: 2005. Australian Institute of Marine Science, Queensland, Australia. 160 pp.

Tillandsia xerographica

BROMELIALES: BROMELIACEAE Tillandsia xerographica II/B

COMMON NAMES: Xerographic Tillandsia (EN), Clavel del Aire (ES)

RANGE STATES: El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico

UNDER REVIEW: Guatemala

EU DECISIONS: Current negative opinion for artificially propagated plants (without cataphylls) from Guatemala formed on 03/12/2010 and confirmed on 07/02/2013. Previous positive opinion for artificially propagated plants from Guatemala formed on 13/12/2004 and previous negative opinion for Guatemala formed on 09/10/2003 with the note “With option of specific cases being brought back to the SRG”.

Current no opinion iii) for artificially propagated plants from the Philippines formed on 09/10/2003.

IUCN: Not assessed

Trade patterns

Tillandsia xerographica was listed in Appendix II on 11/06/1992 and in Annex B of the EU Wildlife Trade Regulations on 01/06/1997.

Guatemala has submitted annual reports for the years 2006-2014, but has not yet submitted an annual report for 2015. Guatemala has published an annual export quota for artificially propagated, live T. xerographica every year 2005-2016 (Table 1). Trade appears to have remained within quota.

Table 1: CITES export quotas for live, artificially propagated Tillandsia xerographica from Guatemala, 2006-2016, and global direct exports as reported by the countries of import and Guatemala 2006-2015.

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Quota 829397 828560 1011152 1454408 666117 798176 383464 391572 310220 421570 991781 Reported by importers 218495 131811 147274 105245 137241 110137 152591 120181 155701 70540 - Reported by Guatemala 283684 252923 203603 261939 117295 115755 167448 144378 200926 - -

Direct exports of T. xerographica from Guatemala to the EU-28 and other countries 2006-2015 were almost entirely comprised of high quantities of live, artificially propagated plants exported for commercial purposes (Table 2). Quantities of exports to the EU-28 over this period were higher than to the rest of the world.

Indirect exports of T. xerographica to the EU-28 2006-2015 originating from Guatemala were comprised of moderate quantities of live, artificially propagated plants exported for commercial purposes.

Tillandsia xerographica

Table 2: Direct exports of Tillandsia xerographica from Guatemala to the EU-28 (EU) and the rest of the world (RoW), 2006-2015. All exports were artificially propagated.

Importer Term Unit Purpose Reported by 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total EU cultures - T Importer 150 60 300 510 Exporter dried plants - B Importer 220 220 Exporter live - B Importer 40 40 Exporter Q Importer 400 400 Exporter T Importer 192210 110102 114730 83770 108516 74895 97806 65509 69110 70540 987188 Exporter 248607 222314 168040 224134 70020 68390 98503 58500 79900 1238408 RoW live kg T Importer 300 822 300 1422 Exporter - T Importer 26285 21709 28431 21475 28725 34842 54745 54672 86591 357475 Exporter 35077 30609 35563 37805 47275 47365 68945 85878 121026 509543 - Importer 4113 4113 Exporter Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 10/08/2016.

Tillandsia xerographica

Conservation status

Tillandsia xerographica is a slow growing plant species (Williams and Hodgson, 1990; PC14 Inf. 8), which is epiphytic on trees and boulders (Rauh, 1990). Typical host species for T. xerographica were reported to include trees or mature shrubs upwards of 20 years of age (Garcia and Chocano, 2008). Blackburn (1993) described two forms of the species (Mexican and Guatemalan) that can be readily distinguished. Vegetative reproduction of T. xerographica was reported to result in plants that may resemble Tillandsia fasciculata, Tillandsia rothii and Tillandsia roland-gosselinii (Luther, 1994).

The species was reported to occur in southern Mexico, Guatemala and El Salvador, where it is restricted to semi-arid areas (CITES Identification Manual, 1993 in PC14 Inf. 8), mainly in dry forests and thorn scrub (Garcia and Chocano, 2008), at elevations of 140-700 m above sea level (Luther, 1994; Garcia and Chocano, 2008). According to Garcia and Chocano (2008), T. xerographica also occurs in Honduras.

The species has not been assessed in the current IUCN Red List, but was previously categorised as Endangered in 1997 (PC14 Inf. 8). The population trend was described as declining (Garcia and Chocano, 2008).

T. xerographica was reported to be highly adaptable to management in nurseries, with a rate of assisted germination of seeds in nurseries estimated to be about 50-60 per cent, with a survival and recruitment rate of up to 95 per cent (Garcia and Chocano, 2008).

Guatemala: T. xerographica was reported to occur in the departments of El Progreso, Zacapa and Chiquimula, in the centre and east of the country (Garcia and Chocano, 2008), in particular, in the semi-arid region of the Rio Motagua valley at the base of the Sierra de las Minas [mountain range] (Garcia and Chocano, 2008; Veliz, 2010). Veliz (2010) also reported the species occurrence in the departments of Jutiapa, Santa Rosa, Escuintla, Suchitepéquez and Retalhuleu, southern Guatemala.

The ecosystems in which T. xerographica occurs in Guatemala were reported to be extremely fragile and fragmented as a result of agricultural expansion (Garcia and Chocano, 2008). Deforestation was considered a major threat to the species, with Zacapa and Chiquimula reported to be among the top five departments for the greatest forest loss in the country in 2008 (Garcia and Chocano, 2008). Other threats to the species were reported to include habitat degradation, introduction of exotic species, harvesting and accidental mortality (Garcia and Chocano, 2008). The species was reported to be highly desired for the export market (FDN et al., 2003).

T. xerographica is mainly exported for ornamental purposes (Acevedo, 2006; Garcia and Chocano, 2008) and the species was considered very common in trade (McGough et al., 2004). Guatemala was reported to be a major producer and exporter (McGough et al., 2004; Sajeve et al., 2007).

In 2003, concerns were raised about the cultivation methods used for T. xerographica and whether they were consistent with the CITES definition of artificial propagation and therefore sustainable (McGough et al., 2004; Sajeve et al., 2007). In 2004, at the request of the CITES Plants Committee (PC) and the EU Scientific Review Group (SRG), a study visit to Guatemala was carried out to observe the status of the species in the wild and the sustainability of its production and export (PC14 Inf. 8). It was found that the species was being collected from the wild in Guatemala in “huge numbers” for commercial trade and populations in Guatemala and El Salvador were considered “totally depleted” by Guatemalan commercial collectors (PC14 Inf. 8). The survey found wild plants in some nurseries, as well as indications of illegal trade in the species from Mexico and accounts of illegal trade from El Salvador, Mexico and Honduras (PC14 Inf. 8).

A normal, healthy population of T. xerographica was reported to range between >2000 and >30 000 plants per km2 (PC14 Inf. 8; Garcia and Chocano, 2008). In El Progreso, the species was recorded at

Tillandsia xerographica densities of 32 - 124 plants per km2 in the 2004 study, and the results of a two-year inventory by the University of Guatemala reported the same year, found average densities of one to seven plants per km2, leading the authors of the first study to conclude that the species may be considered biologically extinct in Guatemala (PC14 Inf. 8). However, it was noted that further field data collected over a wider range are required to determine the biological status of T. xerographica in Guatemala (PC14 Inf. 8; Garcia and Chocano, 2008). Also in 2004, Perez (2004, in: Garcia and Chocano, 2008) reported 140 plants per hectare [14 000 plants per km2] in little disturbed areas.

A management plan for T. xenographica was sanctioned by the Plants Committee and made official through Resolution 05-06-2004 of CONAP (Garcia and Chocano, 2008). The document details the procedures for the exploitation and sustainable management of Tillandsia xerographica, and in 2008, it was reported that these procedures were still being applied (Garcia and Chocano, 2008).

A case study for T. xerographica in Guatemala was produced for an NDF workshop in 2008 (Garcia and Chocano, 2008; Smith et al., 2011). According to the authors of the study, the habitat of the species was reported to occur in nine private protected areas and three municipal protected areas, covering a total of 1371 hectares (Garcia and Chocano, 2008). T. xerographica was reported to be listed on Criterion 1 (Endangered Species) of the Guatemalan List of Threatened Species, which prohibits the export or trade of specimens collected from the wild, including for scientific or reproductive purposes (Garcia and Chocano, 2008; CONAP, 2009). Regulations were reported to be in place for the harvest of parental stock under Article 36 of Decree 4-89 of the Law on Protected Areas and Article 48 of Government Agreement 759-90, Regulation of Decree 4-89 (Garcia and Chocano, 2008).

The CITES Authorities of Guatemala were consulted in August 2016 regarding status and management of T. xerographica in Guatemala, but a response had not been received at the time of writing. References

Acevedo, A.N. 2006. The conservation of thorn scrub and dry forest habitat in the Motagua Valley, Guatemala: Promoting the protection of a unique ecoregion. Iguana, 13(3): 185–191. Blackburn, C. 1993. Tillandsia xerographica. Journal of the Bromeliad Society, 43(1): 26–27. CONAP 2009. Lista de Especies Amenazadas de Guatemala. Consejo Nacional de Areas Protegidas, Guatemala. 124 pp. FDN, TNC and USAID 2003. Plan de Conservación de la Región Semiárida del Valle del Motagua. 66 pp. Garcia, M. and Chocano, H.O. 2008. Tillandsia xerographica in Guatemala. In: CITES NDF Workshop Case Studies, WG2-Perennials Case Study 7. Mexico. 23. Hromadnik, L. 2010. Tillandsia xerographica in Guatemala. Journal of the Bromeliad Society, 60(6): 267+. Luther, H.E. 1994. A guide to the species of Tillandsia regulated by Appendix II of CITES. Selbyana, 15(1): 112–131. McGough, N.H., Groves, M., Mustard, M. and Brodie, C. 2004. CITES and Plants: A User’s Guide. London. 84 pp. Perez, S. 2004. Caracterizacion ecologica de Tillandsia xerographica en el Valle Semiarido del Motagua. In: Seminario de Investigación para la Conservación de la Región Semiárida del Valle del Motagua. Rauh, W. 1990. The Bromeliad lexicon. Blandford, London. 431 pp. Sajeve, M., Carimi, F. and McGough, N. 2007. The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) and its role in conservation of cacti and other succulent plants. Functional Ecosystems and Communities, 1(2): 80–85. Smith, M.J., Benítez-Díaz, H., Clemente-Muñoz, M.Á., Donaldson, J., Hutton, J.M., Noel McGough, H., Medellin, R. a., Morgan, D.H.W., O’Criodain, C. and Oldfield, T.E.E. 2011. Assessing the impacts of international trade on CITES-listed species: Current practices and opportunities for scientific research. Biological Conservation, 144(1): 82–91. Veliz, M. 2010. Guía de Reconocimiento del Género Tillandsia de Guatemala. Guatemala. 118 pp. Williams, B. and Hodgson, I. (Eds.) 1990. Growing Bromeliads. Christopher Helm A & C Black, London. 150 pp.

Gonystylus bancanus

MAGNOLIOPSIDA: THYMELAECEAE Gonystylus bancanus II/B

COMMON NAME: Ramin (EN)

RANGE STATES: Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia, Malaysia

UNDER REVIEW: Indonesia

EU DECISIONS: Current no opinion iii) for wild specimens from Indonesia formed on 12/03/2009 for the genus Gonystylus.

Current positive opinion for wild specimens from Malaysia (applies only to Peninsular Malaysia, Sabah and Sarawak) formed on 12/03/2009 for the genus Gonystylus.

IUCN: Vulnerable

Trade patterns

Gonystylus bancanus was listed in Appendix II on 12/01/2005 and in Annex B of the EU Wildlife Trade Regulations on 22/08/2005 as part of the genus listing for Gonystylus. It was previously listed in Appendix III on 06/08/2001 and in Annex C of the EU Wildlife Trade Regulations on 05/08/2001 as part of the genus listing for Gonystylus.

Indonesia has submitted annual reports for the years 2006-2014, but has not yet submitted an annual report for 2015. Indonesia has published annual export quotas for finished products of G. bancanus every year 2006-2016 (Table 1). It appears that trade has remained within quota.

Table 1: CITES export quotas for finished products (mouldings, dowels, door leaf, plywood, etc.) of Gonystylus bancanus in m³ from Indonesia, 2006-2016, and global direct exports as reported by the countries of import and Indonesia in m³ 2006-2015. No trade was reported 2015. Quantities have been rounded to the nearest whole number where appropriate.

2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 Quota (m3) 8880 5909 5909 8000 8000 5087 4431.7 4432 4432 4322 7203 carvings Reported by importers - - 75 ------Reported by Indonesia ------plywood Reported by importers ------Reported by Indonesia ------2036 175 300 - - timber Reported by importers 721 2733 821 1061 1365 954 552 31 - - - Reported by Indonesia 2230 1142 1000 1245 2587 863 38 - - -

Direct exports of G. bancanus from Indonesia to the EU-28 and elsewhere 2006-2015 mainly comprised wild-sourced timber exported for commercial purposes (Table 2).

Gonystylus bancanus

Indirect exports of G. bancanus to the EU-28 2006-2015 originating from Indonesia comprised 2476 wild-sourced timber (no units), exported via China.

Table 2: Direct exports of Gonystylus bancanus from Indonesia to the EU-28 (EU) and the rest of the world (RoW), 2006-2015. No trade was reported in 2015. All exports were wild-sourced for commercial purposes. Quantities have been rounded to the nearest whole number where appropriate.

Importer Term Unit Reported by 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 Total EU carvings kg Importer 6684 6684 Exporter m³ Importer 75 75 Exporter plywood m³ Importer Exporter 80 80 timber m³ Importer 453 2378 784 83 1060 495 366 5619 Exporter 1517 788 815 835 875 444 38 5312 - Importer 2 2 Exporter 1468 1468 RoW plywood m³ Importer Exporter 1956 175 300 2431 timber m³ Importer 268 356 37 223 306 459 186 31 1866 Exporter 712 354 185 410 1712 419 3792 - Importer Exporter 698 698 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 10/08/2016.

Gonystylus bancanus

Conservation status

Gonystylus bancanus is a canopy-layer tree species that occurs within lowland, freshwater swamp, and peat-swamp forests, up to 100 m in altitude (World Conservation Monitoring Centre, 1998; Kartiko, 2002; Hamzah et al., 2010). Unlike most other higher altitude Gonystylus species, G. bancanus was reported to be primarily found in coastal peat-swamp forest; it was also reported to be found in heath forest (CITES CoP13 Prop 50).

G. bancanus occurs in Peninsular Malaysia and on the islands of Borneo (Brunei Darussalam; West and Central Kalimantan; Sabah and Sarawak), Bangka and Sumatra (World Conservation Monitoring Centre, 1998; Kartiko, 2002; Swee and Chua, 2008; Hamzah et al., 2010). It was described as a medium to relatively large, dominant tree species (World Conservation Monitoring Centre, 1998), reaching 40 m in height, with an approximate diameter at breast height of 120 cm (Kartiko, 2002 in: Hamzah et al., 2010). Within mixed swamp forest, it was described as the most abundant large tree, at a density of 20 trees/ha, with a diameter above 50 cm (CoP13 Prop 50). G. bancanus was recognised as having a slow capacity to regenerate (Wardhani et al., 2010). The species has been described as ‘gregarious’, as young individuals have the tendency to clump together within a small area beneath their parent trees (Shamsudin and Ng, 1995 in: Hamzah et al., 2010).

G. bancanus was categorised as Vulnerable by the IUCN, on account of its populations being heavily depleted from the harvest of ‘ramin’ timber (World Conservation Monitoring Centre, 1998), however this listing requires updating.

Ramin (Gonystylus spp.) is one of the most commercially important hardwood species from Southeast Asia, commanding some of the highest prices per cubic metre (EIA and Telepak Indonesia, 2001; TRAFFIC Europe, 2004). G. bancanus is documented to be the main source of ramin timber, which is a white to light yellowish heartwood, being very suitable for veneer and plywood (Nair and Sumardi, 2000; Kartiko, 2002). It is known to be highly valued for light construction (i.e. furniture, interior decoration, flooring, door and window frames), but has also been used for planks, barrels and shipboards (Kartiko, 2002; CoP13 Prop 50). G. bancanus was also documented to be harvested for local traditional medicine (i.e. as a protective medicine after childbirth), for use as fish poison, and as incense (Orwa et al., 2009). Illegal imports of large quantities of ramin from Indonesian into Malaysia, Singapore and China has also been reported (EIA and Telepak Indonesia, 2001; TRAFFIC Europe, 2004; CoP13 Prop 50). The Malaysian Government was reported to have imposed an import ban on all ramin logs from Indonesia into Malaysia (CoP13 Prop 50).

In addition to overexploitation, G. bancanus was reported to be threatened by habitat loss (World Conservation Monitoring Centre, 1998) and forest degradation, with peat-swamp forests being particularly prone to fire (CoP13 Prop 50).

Indonesia: Gonystylus bancanus was documented to occur in West and Central Kalimantan (Borneo), south-eastern Sumatra, and on the island of Bangka (World Conservation Monitoring Centre, 1998; Kartiko, 2002). In 1983, the Directorate of Forestry Planning, Indonesia calculated the total initial standing stock of ramin (Gonystylus spp.) to be approximately 130 722 trees with a diameter above 35 cm and approximately 88 877 trees with a diameter above 50 cm (in: CoP13 Prop 50). In 1994, it was estimated that West Kalimatan had an extent of 1 million ha of productive ramin peat forest, with an average standing stock of 30 m3/ha, whereas in Central Kalimantan ramin forest covered approximately 1.5 million ha with an average standing timber volume of 25 m3/ha (Soerianegara and Lemmens, 1994 in: CoP13 Prop. 50). It was reported that G. bancanus had been heavily depleted throughout Indonesia as a result of over-exploitation to supply the high demand of international markets (Soerianegara and Lemmens, 1994 in: CoP13 Prop. 50).

Gonystylus bancanus

Indonesia’s annual production of ramin (Gonystylus spp.) was also reported to have declined since the early 1990s; Indonesian average production of ramin declined from 900 000 m3/ha in 1991-1992 to approximately 300 000 m3/ha in 1998 and 130 000 m3/ha5 by 2000 (CoP13 Prop 50).

Kalimantan was reported to have suffered heavily from illegal logging, including encroachment deep into protected areas such as Tanjung Puting National Park in Central Kalimantan (Samedi, 2003 in: CoP13 Prop 50). Forest degradation was reported as a further major threat to G. bancanus, caused by conversion to other uses and forest fires (Indonesian Ministry of the Environment, 1996, in: CoP13 Prop 50). It was estimated that the rate of peat swamp forest deforestation ranged from 700 000 to 1 200 000 ha per year.

Although G. bancanus is not listed as a protected species in Indonesia (Republic of Indonesia, 1999), the Indonesian government issued a logging moratorium policy for ramin in 2001, and listed Gonystylus spp. in CITES Appendix III in the same year (Wardhani et al., 2010). The logging ban was followed by the inventory of the stockpiles, which were then exported under a strict control until the end of 2001 (CoP13 Prop 50). After 2001, only concessionaires holding a certificate of Sustainable Forest Management were allowed to harvest and export ramin, on the basis of an annual harvest quota set by the Government of Indonesia. Natural ramin peat-swamp forest was reported to be managed under the Indonesian Selective Felling and Planting system, with a diameter limit of 35 cm and a cutting cycle of 35 years (CoP13 Prop 50). Enrichment planting was also reported to be undertaken to ensure healthy regeneration (CoP13 Prop 50).

Wardhani et al. (2010) reported that the Indonesian government had designated specific sites for the conservation of G. bancanus, by incorporating several peat-swamp forests containing G. bancanus into National Parks. These included: Sebangau National Park and Tanjung Puting National Park in Central Kalimantan, and Berbak National Park and Kerumutan Nature Reserves in Sumatra (Wardhani et al., 2010). It was documented that the Indonesian government had also designated specific sites for the preservation of G. bancanus’s genetic diversity, which included Tubang Nusa Research Station, Lahei Seed Production area and Tubang Nusa Research Station (Wardhani et al., 2010).

The CITES Authorities of Indonesia were consulted in July 2016 regarding status and management of G. bancanus in Indonesia, but a response had not been received at the time of writing. References

Directorate of Planning. 1983. Potential and distribution of commercial timber, Ramin. Book 3. Directorate General of Forestry, Indonesia. (In Indonesian). EIA and Telepak Indonesia 2001. Timber trafficking – illegal logging in Indonesia, South East Asia and international consumption of illegally sourced timber. Available at: http://www.mekonginfo.org/assets/midocs/0002835- environment-timber-trafficking-illegal-logging-in-indonesia-south-east-asia-and-international-consumption- of-illegally-sourced-timber.pdf. Hamzah, K.A., Parlan, I., Sulaiman, A., Faidi, M.A., Yong, H. and Kamarazaman, I.S. 2010. Gonystylus bancanus jewel of the peat swamp forest. Gemilang Press Sdn. Bhd., Sungai Buloh, Malaysia. 83 pp. Kartiko, H.D.P. 2002. Gonystylus bancanus (Miq.) Kurz. Seed Leaflet No. 58. DANIDA Forest Seed Centre, Denmark. Ministry of Environment. 1996. The national strategy and action plan for the management of Indonesian wetlands. Bogor. Nair, K.S.S. and Sumardi 2000. Insect pests and diseases of major plantation species. In: Nair, K.S.S. (Ed.). Insect pests and diseases in Indonesian forests. Centre for International Forest Research, Bogor, Indonesia. 27. Orwa, C., Mutua, A., Kindt, R., Jamnadass, R. and Athony, S. 2009. Gonystylus bancanus. Agroforestree database: A tree reference and selection guide version 4.0. Available at: http://www.worldagroforestry.org/treedb/AFTPDFS/Gonystylus_bancanus.PDF. [Accessed: 4 July 2016]. Republic of Indonesia 1999. Indonesian Government Regulation No. 7 concerning the preservation of wild plants and animals. Peraturan Pemerintah Republik Indonesia, Indonesia.

5 Although the Ministry of Forestry approved total annual allowable cut for this year was reported to be 24 000 m3/ha (CoP13 Prop 50).

Gonystylus bancanus

Samedi, 2003. Appendix III and the conservation of ramin (Gonystylus spp.) in Indonesia. CITES World – Official Newsletter of the Parties Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) 11: 9-10. Shamsudin, I. and Ng, T.P. 1995. Population and distribution patterns of Gonystylus bancanus in primary peat swamp forest at Pekan, Pahang. In: Abdul Rahim, A.M., Abdul Rahim, N., Aminuddin, M., Lee, S.S., Andrew, W.H.H. and Khoo, K.C. (Eds.). Proceedings of third conference of forestry and forest products research (Vol. 1). Forest Research Institute Malaysia (FRIM). 35–44. Soerianegara, I. and Lemmens, R.H.M.J. 1994. Plant resources of South-East Asia - Timber trees: major commercial timbers. Prosea, Bogor, Indonesia. - pp. Sumadiwangsa, S. 1997. Kayu gaharu komoditi elit di Kalimantan Timur (Agarwood as a high-value commodity in East Kalimantan). Duta Rimba, 20(193-194). Swee, L. and Chua, L. 2008. Ramin (Gonystylus bancanus) in Malaysia. Mexico. 21 pp. TRAFFIC Europe 2004. An assessment of the international trade in Ramin Gonystylus spp. with a focus on the role of the European Union. Report to the European Commission. 20 pp. Wardhani, M., Yafid, B., Komar, T.E., Nurjanah, S. and Rosita, D.T. (Eds.) 2010. Gonystylus spp. (Ramin): Population status, genetics and gene conservation. ITTO-CITES project on exploratory assessment on the population distribution and potential uses of non-Gonystylus bancanus species in Indonesia. ITTO, Bogor, Indonesia. 40 pp. World Conservation Monitoring Centre 1998. Gonystylus bancanus. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2016.1. Available at: http://www.iucnredlist.org/. [Accessed: 4 July 2016].

Appendix

Appendix Table 1: Purpose of trade Code Description T Commercial Z Zoo G Botanical garden Q Circus or travelling exhibition S Scientific H Hunting trophy P Personal M Medical (including biomedical research) E Educational N Reintroduction or introduction into the wild B Breeding in captivity or artificial propagation L Law enforcement / judicial / forensic

Table 2: Source of specimens Code Description W Specimens taken from the wild R Ranched specimens: specimens of animals reared in a controlled environment, taken as eggs or juveniles from the wild, where they would otherwise have had a very low probability of surviving to adulthood D Appendix-I animals bred in captivity for commercial purposes in operations included in the Secretariat's Register, in accordance with Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev. CoP15), and Appendix-I plants artificially propagated for commercial purposes, as well as parts and derivatives thereof, exported under the provisions of Article VII, paragraph 4, of the Convention A Plants that are artificially propagated in accordance with Resolution Conf. 11.11 (Rev. CoP15), as well as parts and derivatives thereof, exported under the provisions of Article VII, paragraph 5 (specimens of species included in Appendix I that have been propagated artificially for non-commercial purposes and specimens of species included in Appendices II and III) C Animals bred in captivity in accordance with Resolution Conf. 10.16 (Rev.), as well as parts and derivatives thereof, exported under the provisions of Article VII, paragraph 5 F Animals born in captivity (F1 or subsequent generations) that do not fulfil the definition of ‘bred in captivity’ in Resolution Conf. 10.16 (Rev.), as well as parts and derivatives thereof U Source unknown (must be justified) I Confiscated or seized specimens (may be used with another code) O Pre-Convention specimens