Council of the European Union Brussels, 17 December 2019 (OR. en, fr)
14741/19
ENV 978 WTO 334
INFORMATION NOTE From: General Secretariat of the Council To: Delegations Subject: Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES): Eighteenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties (CoP18) (Geneva, 17-28 August 2019) - Statements by the EU and its Member States
Delegations will find in the Annex, for information, a compilation of agreed statements on behalf of the EU and its Member States for the above meeting.
14741/19 LZ/mb 1 TREE.1.A EN/FR
ANNEX
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES): Eighteenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties (CoP18) (Geneva, 17-28 August 2019)
- Statements by the EU and its Member States -
Document No: 4 Agenda item: Rules of procedure Proponent: Secretariat (4.1)/Standing Committee (4.2)
1. Dear Madam Chair, on behalf of the EU and its Member States, we welcome the need to further the design of the Convention’s Rules of Procedure to accommodate any necessary improvements.
2. We agree that the Rules of Procedure must remain valid through CoP18, as per Rule 32 of the Convention.
3. We support the establishment of a new mandate for the Standing Committee to review Rule 25.
In relation to the Rules of Procedure the following statement on the EU voting right was made:
1. Thank you Chair. I am intervening on a very important issue for the European Union and its Member States. The rights of the European Union as a party have been challenged by Japan in this Committee in the context of the vote on listing proposal 45 before the lunch break. We cannot accept that our rights as a party are challenged, Chair.
2. We would like to recall the understanding based on which this Conference adopted its Rules of Procedure at the start of the meeting. It is recorded in the draft summary report of the first plenary session (CoP18 Plen. Rec. 1):
"The 28 EU Member States will remain present during the entire CoP18. It is understood that the EU Member States will attend each session of the CoP and it is understood that no Party will challenge the EU’s exercise of its right to vote at CoP18."
3 We agreed to renew this understanding in good faith at this CoP with the aim of having a pragmatic way of allowing the Conference of the Parties to proceed without delay.
4. It is not consistent with this general understanding if individual Parties, or indeed the Chair, ask for confirmation, with regard to any particular session, that all EU Member States are present in the room. We trust that this will not repeat itself, and that the compromise reached on the Rules of Procedure will not be challenged anymore.
5. We would like this statement to be recorded in the summary of this meeting.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 2 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Document No: 7.6 Agenda item: Sponsored delegates project Proponent: Secretariat
1. Dear Mr Chair, on behalf of the EU and its Member States, we consider the Sponsored Delegates Project as a very successful instrument, which has given many delegations the opportunity to attend the Conference of the Parties to the Convention.
2. As the main donor to the project, we see the participation of a maximum number of Parties to CoP meetings as a key element. There are significant benefits in informing decisions with knowledge and experience from a large number of countries, and ensuring ownership of the decisions adopted by the CoP.
3. The EU and its Member States encourage also other Parties to financially contribute to the project. At the same time, any financial support of delegates outside the framework of the project should be done in a transparent way, in line with Resolution Conf. 17.3.
4. The EU and its Member States support therefore the Secretariat’s recommendations to delete Decision 17.17 and to adopt the draft decision presented in Annex 1 to document CoP18 Doc. 7.6.
5. The EU and its Member States also support the recommendation to continue applying the current selection criteria to prioritize Parties to benefit from the Project as well as the Secretariat’s proposal to explore the extension of the project to the meetings of the Animals, Plants and Standing Committees.
------
Document No: 8 Agenda item: Draft resolution on language strategy for the Convention Proponent: Iraq
1. Mister Chair, on behalf of the EU and its Member States, we acknowledge the need to improve the linguistic tools and to make documents accessible for all Parties to the CITES Convention.
2. However, any change to the current language strategy must consider the budgetary implications as well as the potential delays translations may impose on document production. The cost estimate provided by the Secretariat in its comment to document 8 are not reassuring in this regard.
3. Arabic is one of three UN languages currently not included in the CITES language strategy. Fairness would require that, if the strategy was to be changed, Chinese and Russian would also be added. This would not be feasible without significant additional resources.
4. The before mentioned issues (budgetary implications and fairness) should be considered in the in-session working group. ------
14741/19 LZ/mb 3 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Document No: 10 Agenda item: CITES Strategic Vision post-2020 Proponent: Standing Committee
1. Madam Chair, on behalf of the EU and its Member States, we welcome and support the adoption of the revised Strategic Vision.
2. We also support the need to amend the draft decisions in order to task the Secretariat to compare the objectives with existing Decisions and Resolutions and base this analysis on indicators.
------
Document No: 11 Agenda item: Review of the Convention Proponent: DRC, Namibia, Zimbabwe
1. The EU and its Member States thank the DRC, Namibia and Zimbabwe for their efforts in putting forward this proposal. We agree with the proponents, that the first (and only) comprehensive review of the effectiveness of the Convention, dating back to 1994, has been a fruitful initiative that has led to many improvements in the workings of the Convention. Indeed, knowledge of the effectiveness of its mechanisms, and flexibility to address potential deficits, remains critical to maintain the Convention's credibility in the face of increasingly intense and complex challenges.
2. With regard to the proponents’ proposal to review the equitability of the Convention, we are of the view that the Convention has developed wide-ranging mechanisms to address equitability and fairness in the treatment of both, States and people. This includes, among others, Res. Conf. 8.4 (Rev. CoP15) on National laws for the implementation of the Convention, Res. Conf. 10.3 on the Designation and role of the Scientific Authorities, with a current parallel process for Management Authorities, Res. Conf. 13.2 (Rev. CoP14) on Sustainable use of biodiversity: Addis Ababa Principles and Guidelines, Res. Conf. 15.2 on Wildlife trade policy reviews, Res. Conf. 16.6 (Rev. CoP17) on CITES and livelihoods, and many others, including long-term initiatives to support national efforts in legislative development, enforcement, training and capacity-building. There is clearly room for improvement on some relevant issues, such as in engaging rural communities. 3. However, we are not in a position to support this proposal to review the equitability of the Convention, but will continue to consider the issue of equitability in the context of existing CITES mechanisms.
4. We would remain open, however, to consider a second review of the effectiveness of the Convention, with a focus on issues of practical importance that can be addressed without having to renegotiate the text of the Treaty.
14741/19 LZ/mb 4 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
5. On the issue of perceived contradictions between CITES and GATT, and the proposed comprehensive review of the relationship between these two organizations, we acknowledge that this has, on many occasions in the past, been the subject of intense discussions. However, we believe that the relationship between CITES and GATT has been a harmonious one for many years and we therefore agree with the CITES Secretariat that we cannot see sufficient justification for a review.
6. With regard to revisiting the Periodic Review of the Appendices in Res. Conf. 14.8 (Rev. CoP17), we recognize that despite many attempts during the last years, little progress has been made to ensure that the Appendices are an accurate reflection of the conservation status of its listed species, as is called for in Res. Conf. 16.3 (Rev. CoP17) on CITES Strategic Vision: 2008-2020, and the current draft revision that was submitted to this Conference of the Parties. This is clearly an issue that may affect the credibility of the Convention and one that requires attention. Nevertheless, as is the case for a review of the Convention, the proposal does not provide the necessary funding and this would have to be considered and substantial revisions of the content of the proposal would have to be undertaken before taking these proposals further.
7. In summary, while we are not in a position to support the proposals now in front of us, the EU and its Member States would be open to engaging with other Parties in discussing the mandate, the process and funding for some of the proposed work.
------
Document No: 12 Agenda item: Securing better implementation of marine fish species listings in the Appendices Proponent: Antigua and Barbuda
1. Thank you Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We would like to thank Antigua and Barbuda for bringing forward this proposal, however we do not agree with a number of the recommendations, and we share most of the Secretariat's observations on the proposal.
3. While we acknowledge there are challenges associated with implementing CITES listings for some species, we are not convinced marine species in general, and especially marine fishes, are such a special case that they require more attention than other species.
4. Enforcement and implementation problems are not exclusively associated with marine species. Problems with the implementation of other animal and plant listings are also apparent.
14741/19 LZ/mb 5 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
5. Conservation and sustainable management of marine species, such as eels, sharks and sea cucumbers, vary greatly due to differences in biology and ecology, and in how they are exploited. Because of these differences, we do not agree that all marine species should be treated as a separate and distinct group under CITES as suggested in document 12. Marine fish species is rather an economic group than an scientific or biological group.
6. Since 2013, the listing of additional marine taxa has generated much-needed attention to their conservation status and has led to increased funding for relevant conservation measures. Significant support has been provided by Parties – including the EU – and civil-society organisations to implement listings and help combat the main threat facing these species – overexploitation. As a result of being listed on the CITES Appendices, the management of a number of marine species has already improved.
7. Where species listings do not yet show the desired results, this might be a sign that more capacity-building and support is required for successful implementation. It cannot serve as a reason to stop further listing of marine species.
8. We recognise the utility of measuring the effectiveness, conservation benefits and broader impacts which result from the implementation of species listings. However, review of previous listings should focus on particular cases, with clear justification, making use of existing mechanisms and recommendations from previous reviews. The limited resources which are available for such purposes should not be diverted to additional ad-hoc processes.
9. Any listing of additional species should follow the basic premise of determining whether the species is at risk from international trade, and the decision to amend Convention’s Appendices should be taken according to criteria for amendment established in Resolution Conf. 9.24. We therefore oppose any kind of “embargo” on new listings of any group of species.
10. We would suggest that this Conference does not take the proposal forward as it stands.
------
Document No: 13 Agenda item: Revision of Resolution Conf. 11.1 (Rev. CoP17) on Establishment of committees Proponent: Standing Committee / Secretariat
Madam Chair, on behalf of the EU and its Member States, we welcome and support the proposed new Resolution as amended by the Secretariat.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 6 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Document No: 15.1 Agenda item: Cooperation with other biodiversity-related conventions Proponent: Standing Committee
1. Thank you Chair. The EU and its Member States welcome the ongoing work in different fora to strengthen cooperation and synergies between the biodiversity related conventions.
2. We believe that this is key to streamline the work of the different secretariats, save resources and achieve a higher impact of the different conventions when it comes to implementation on the ground.
3. In this respect, the Liaison Group of Biodiversity-related Conventions, where the CITES Secretariat participates regularly, plays a leading role and should continue to do so.
4. Of particular relevance is the cooperation with the Convention on Biological Diversity in the process of developing the post-2020 global biodiversity framework. The EU and its Member States are in favour of an ambitious framework where CITES should make a significant contribution to halting and reversing biodiversity loss.
5. Equally important is the cooperation with the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS) which is complementary with the CITES remit. Good examples of this cooperation have been the creation of a Liaison Officer between the two secretariats and the establishment of an African Carnivore Initiative as an umbrella project that targets four iconic African carnivore species: the African Lion, Cheetah, Leopard and the African Wild Dog. The EU and its Member States would like to see this Initiative continued as well.
6. Similarly, a renewed CITES-CMS Joint Work Programme 2020–2025 should be developed and approved by the Standing Committee in due course. The cooperation and synergies between CITES and CMS could be used as a model for cooperation with other Multilateral Environment Agreements (MEAs).
7. We can see merit in the Secretariat's suggestion to explore the utility of an "omnibus" resolution on cooperation between CITES and other relevant entities. We therefore support the proposal in draft decision 18.AA for the Secretariat to prepare a report summarizing existing practices in other biodiversity-related conventions.
8. Going forward towards such a draft resolution for CoP 19, it would also be useful to know how well existing practices in other conventions are working, and whether their resolutions and decisions have generated relevant follow-up. We would therefore propose to add to draft Decision 18.AA as follows:
Decision 18.AA Directed to the Secretariat "The Secretariat shall prepare a report summarizing existing practices in other biodiversity- related conventions concerning decisions and resolutions of their governing bodies on synergies, and the output following from those resolutions and decisions, as well as partnerships and cooperation with entities such as: biodiversity-related and other conventions, other multilateral environmental agreements, international initiatives, international organizations and inter-agency and coordination networks."
14741/19 LZ/mb 7 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
9. To conclude, we believe that synergies among biodiversity MEAs should continue to be strengthened and it is appropriate for the Standing Committee to keep matters under review, including by preparing a report on the implementation of draft Decisions 18.AA and 18.BB as proposed by the Secretariat for consideration by the 19th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP 19). We also support extension of Decisions 17.55 and 17.56 until CoP 19.
------
Document No: 15.3 Agenda item: Global Strategy for Plant Conservation Proponent: Plants Committee
1. The EU and its Member States agree to delete Decisions 17.53 and 17.54 and support the new draft decisions as outlined in the document.
2. We would like to urge all Parties to support targets which aim to support and ensure sustainable trade, and submit relevant information to the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation on CITES through their National Focal Points.
------
Document No: 15.4 Agenda item: Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) Proponent: Secretariat and Standing Committee
1. Thank you, Chair. I am speaking on behalf of the European Union and its Member States.
2. We would like to highlight the importance of IPBES as a partner of the Convention in years to come, and its relevant objective, which is to strengthen the science-policy interface for biodiversity and ecosystem services for the conservation and sustainable use of biodiversity, long-term human well-being and sustainable development.
3. We welcome and support the draft resolution on Cooperation with IPBES, as it provides a more permanent basis for this important cooperative relationship, alongside the Memorandum of Cooperation between the two Secretariats, which remains effective until 31 December 2019. We thank the Secretariat for its proposal to align the text of the draft resolution with the language on legal acquisition findings used in the draft resolution under item 39 on our agenda at this meeting. We would suggest that instead of referring to the previous Strategic Vision in the first preambular paragraph, the new Strategic Vision, if adopted at this meeting, should be referenced.
4. The Summary for Policy Makers of the Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services was adopted at the 7th session of the IPBES Plenary in May this year, and it has a very clear message: nature is declining globally at rates unprecedented in human history, and the rate of species extinctions is accelerating, with grave impacts on people around the world. The summary of the global assessment also highlights how important it is to combat wildlife and timber trafficking through effective enforcement, and to ensure the legality and sustainability of trade in wildlife.
14741/19 LZ/mb 8 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
5. The IPBES Plenary also confirmed that the thematic assessment of the sustainable use of wild species will be carried out within the next two years, for consideration by the 9th IPBES Plenary and hopefully also by the 19th CITES CoP. We thank the Secretariat for having contributed to the scoping for this assessment on behalf of the Parties, and we remain committed to providing further input to the assessment.
------
Document No: 15.5 Agenda item: The International Consortium on Combating Wildlife Crime (ICCWC) Proponent: Secretariat
1. Madam Chair, on behalf of the EU and its Member States, we commend ICCWC partners for the significant progress achieved in building capacity among enforcement authorities dealing with wildlife trafficking at global level, by providing the tools, services and technical support they need to fight organised crime and corruption.
2. As the main donors to ICCWC, the EU and its Member States strongly support the continuation of the activities of the consortium. Therefore, we support the adoption of the proposed draft decision presented in Annex 1 to document CoP18 Doc. 15.5, aiming at encouraging Parties to continue funding the consortium.
3. Given the importance of information-sharing and better coordination with other donors and stakeholders involved in the fight against wildlife trafficking, the EU and its Member States also invite ICCWC partners to ensure effective transparency mechanisms and to make sure that the main results and priorities set as a follow-up to implementation of the toolkit are made publicly available, whenever this can be done without reducing the effectiveness of the ICCWC intervention.
------
Document No:15.6 Agenda item: Cooperation between CITES and the World Heritage Convention Proponent: Norway
1. Thank you, Chair. I am speaking on behalf of the European Union and its Member States.
2. We acknowledge the increasing concern of the World Heritage Convention (WHC) at the growing problem of illegal and unsustainable off-take of CITES listed species and appreciate the WHC’s interest in working together.
3. We would like to stress the importance and urgent need for strengthened cooperation between the two regimes in addressing the common threat of illegal and unsustainable off-take of CITES-listed species.
14741/19 LZ/mb 9 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
4. We appreciate Norway’s work in drafting the Resolution calling for the development of a Memorandum of Understanding between the WHC and CITES and agree with the Secretariat’s amendments, including the proposed deletion of paragraph 2, as this task is already included in the draft Decisions.
5. As regards Annex 2 of this document, we support Norway’s proposal and object to the Secretariat’s suggestion to delete Decisions 18.BB and 18.CC. We propose additional wording in Decisions 18.BB and 18.CC to also reference any joint programme of work in addition to the Memorandum of Understanding so it would read:
18.BB Directed to the Secretariat The Secretariat shall submit a draft Memorandum of Understanding and any joint programme of work agreed with the UNESCO World Heritage Centre to the Standing Committee for approval, prior to the 73rd meeting of the Standing Committee.
18.CC Directed to the Standing Committee The Standing Committee shall consider the draft Memorandum of Understanding and any joint programme of work transmitted by the CITES Secretariat on cooperation with the UNESCO World Heritage Centre, and if it is agreed shall report accordingly to the 19th meeting of the Conference of the Parties.
------
Document No: 17 and 18 Agenda item: Rural communities Proponent: Secretariat
1. The EU and its Member States welcome the various documents on the important issue of rural communities and livelihoods submitted to this 18th Conference of the Parties.
2. The significant rise in the number of proposals on rural communities and livelihoods at this CoP reflects the importance that many CITES Parties increasingly attribute to this issue.
3. The preamble of the Convention correctly recognizes that peoples and States are and should be the best protectors of their own wild fauna and flora. The important role of rural communities has also been, implicitly or explicitly, recognized in various CITES Resolutions and Decisions.
4. Additionally, the significant levels of illegal killings, particularly of high-value species such as rhino, elephant and more recently pangolin, has also led to many high-level international events and initiatives. These recognize that conservation and/or sustainable management of natural resources with the engagement of rural communities can contribute to effectively tackle illegal wildlife trade.
14741/19 LZ/mb 10 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
5. It is also widely recognized that well regulated legal trade can benefit both rural communities and species conservation, thus the link between socio-economic and conservation concerns is relevant for the achievement of many goals of the CITES Strategic Vision. High levels of poaching however, very often has a devastating impact on both livelihoods and conservation, that makes the achievement of these goals impossible. Therefore, the engagement of rural communities in conservation is of key importance, which in some circumstances can be of great assistance to authorities in tackling illegal trade in wildlife.
6. Despite relevant text in various CITES Resolutions, the impression remains that the voices of rural communities are not always adequately heard in practice. We therefore support exploring solutions to improve CITES’ recognition of rural community issues and their ability to effectively represent their concerns nationally and within CITES.
7. As the intention of some proposals on the table overlap, we consider it desirable to create an in-session working group to recommend a way forward. We are prepared to engage in a constructive process of negotiation to move this issue forward in the context of the more effective implementation of the Convention and hence the protection of its listed species.
8. This in-session working group could consider the elements contained in documents 17.1 to 18.3 jointly and propose recommendations on a way forward for the Conference to consider. The in-session working group could also propose a mandate for an intersessional working group to address any remaining issues.
------
Document No: 17.1 Agenda item: Rural Communities – Report of the Standing Committee Proponent: Standing Committee
We welcome the report of the Standing Committee. Subject to the availability of funds, we support the re-establishment of the intersessional CITES working group to consider how to effectively engage rural communities in CITES processes and to report to the COP19, as there was still disagreement in the working group on how this issues can best be addressed in the CITES fora. In this context, we also support the Secretariat’s proposal to amend Res. 16.6 on including rural community representatives in national CITES delegations as one step forward to enhance rural community voices in CITES.
------
Document No: 17.2 Agenda item: Proposed amendments to Res. Conf. 4.6 (Rev. CoP17) and Res. Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP17) Proponent: Namibia; Zimbabwe
1. As we have stated before, we agree that the sustainable use of wild flora and fauna can be beneficial for rural communities and for conservation efforts under CITES, and that we need to find solutions to more effectively engage rural communities in the CITES processes.
14741/19 LZ/mb 11 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
2. On the issue of considering listing impacts on rural communities, we oppose the proposed amendment to Res. Conf. 4.6. as this Resolution is mostly focused on formalities and procedures for the submission of draft resolutions, draft decision and other documents for the COP and does not make any statements on the substantive requirements of a proposal. The suggested amendments therefore seem out of place in this Resolution.
3. On the issue of consulting and providing information regarding the involvement of rural communities, the proposed amendments to Res. Conf. 9.24 Annex 6, section C can be accepted, if the geographical scope of the consultation is limited to those within each Party’s own territory. Otherwise, Parties would need to consult with rural communities in other territories. This would raise not only sovereignty concerns, but also practical issues, as it would make it impossible to identify all relevant rural communities, particularly in case of listings of species with large distribution ranges, which could make listing proposals difficult, or even hamper their acceptance. Furthermore, we want to emphasize that, although the additional input gained by amending Annex 6 of Res. Conf. 9.24 would provide useful information and encourage Parties to engage local communities – resulting in better implementation of species listing - the foundation for evaluating listing proposals must remain the scientific listing criteria laid down in Res. Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP17). The proposed amendments to Res. Conf. 9.24 Annex 6 section C) should therefore not be construed as new listing criteria nor should they change existing listing criteria, but only be understood as additional information to be provided, as and if appropriate.
------
Document No: 17.3 Agenda item: Participatory mechanism for rural communities Proponent: Botswana, Democratic Republic of Congo, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe
1. Dear Chair, the EU and its Member States welcome the various proposals and remain open for constructive engagement on these issues, including discussing additional mechanisms to strengthen the voice of rural communities in the CITES process. However, we cannot support a permanent rural communities' committee, primarily because it would represent an unbalanced approach with regard to other stakeholders.
2. As we already stated previously, we welcome and support the proposal by the CITES Secretariat in doc. 17.1 to include rural community representatives in national CITES delegations, as appropriate, by amending Res. Conf. 16.6 and see this as one mechanism with potential to more effectively include rural community voices at CITES.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 12 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Document No: 18.1 Agenda item: CITES and livelihoods-Report of the Secretariat Proponent: Secretariat
1. Thank you, Chair. The EU and its Member States welcome the report of the Secretariat and its commitment to these important issues, which are recognized by the multiple related proposals submitted at this Conference.
2. We therefore support the draft Decisions proposed by the Secretariat as a starting point, as they aim to develop the necessary tools, analysis and support in an effort to more effectively engage rural communities in the CITES processes and the conservation of species.
------
Document No: 18.2 Agenda item: CITES and livelihoods- Proposal by Peru Proponent: Peru
1. The EU and its Member States welcome the document presented by Peru. In the context of recognizing the important role of rural communities and livelihoods in CITES, we support the re-establishment of the working group on CITES and Livelihoods and its mandate to consider solutions for maximizing sustainable livelihoods and the conservation of the species, and for gaining valuable information about the consequences of CITES trade decisions, as set out in draft Decisions 18AA a) and d) and 18BB, subject to the availability of funds.
2. However, with regard to draft Decisions 18.AA b) and c), we agree with the comments made by the Secretariat and would therefore oppose these suggested tasks.
3. We also note that the set of draft Decisions proposed by the Secretariat in the related document 18.1 would complement the work of the renewed intersessional working group, adding to a complete and comprehensive activity.
4. Regarding the establishment of an international day for livelihoods and rural communities, we are open to consider this proposal, but question the need for a stand-alone CITES Resolution. Alternatively, the CITES Secretariat could raise this issue with the UN or consider other proposals made by earlier speakers.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 13 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Document No: 19 Agenda item: Food security and livelihoods Proponent: Standing Committee
Thank you Chair. The EU and its Member States do not support the renewal of Decisions 17.41 to 17.43 for the reasons outlined by the Secretariat in their comments, that is the intersessional WG has not made progress and the proponents of the original draft resolution were not able to develop a revised draft for consideration at the 70th meeting of the Standing Committee (SC 70). The report presented in SC 70 doc. 17 also suggests significant internal disagreements on the way forward. We are also of the view that Res. Conf. 16.6 (Rev. Cop17) on CITES and Livelihoods adequately addresses livelihood and food security concerns and we are already discussing closely related issues under the preceding agenda items 17 and 18.
------
Document No: 21.2 and 21.3 Agenda item: Capacity-building activities specified in Resolutions and Decisions
1. Thank you Mr Chair.
2. The EU and its Member States are strong supporters of CITES capacity building efforts. We therefore welcome the draft Decisions proposed by the Standing Committee. We trust that these Decisions will help developing a more comprehensive and effective framework to coordinate capacity building activities.
3. We also welcome the valuable initiative by the US in submitting agenda item 21.3. We share the view that capacity building activities taking place under CITES would benefit from a more comprehensive and effective coordination framework. We would nonetheless like to express concerns about the suggested adoption of the proposed Resolution at CoP18. We consider that more discussion on this framework is needed with input from a wide range of parties from all regions.
4. In line with the Secretariat’s suggestions, the EU and its Member States see value in integrating relevant elements from the proposed decisions in Annex 2 of document 21.3 into the draft decisions presented in Annex 2 of document 21.2. We especially support the proposal to direct the Standing Committee to review the draft resolution for consideration at CoP 19. We support therefore the adoption of the draft Decisions as presented in Annex 2 of document 21.2.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 14 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Document No: 25 Agenda item: Review of Decisions Proponent: Secretariat
1. Mr Chair, on behalf of the EU and its Member States, we support the recommendations of the Secretariat as presented in 22 separated items under the annex of document 25.
2. One item on ‘Illegal trade in cheetahs (Acinonyx jubatus)’ deletion of Decisions 17.124 to 17.130 has already been agreed on under agenda item WD 60.
3. With regard to Decision 17.120 on Reporting requirements we would like to pass following comment: we consider the list of reporting requirements available on the CITES webpage is useful and important; hence it should be kept up-dated, although we recognise that this requires staff resources. We support the recommendation of the Secretariat to amend Res. Conf. 4.6 by adding a new paragraph 4 c) bis and with that to delete Decision 17.120.
4. Finally, we appreciate the retention of Decision 14.81 regarding Great Whales.
5. [As a reminder: a) If a Party insists on the continuation of certain Decisions, we would not oppose the continutation! b) some proposals to delete Decisions depends on further information given at CoP 18 via Information docs (see updated version of the Identification Guide for Ivory and Ivory Substitutes or Inf. Doc. 68) or via certain agenda items]
------
Document No: 26 Agenda item: National laws for implementation of the Convention Proponent: Secretariat
1. The EU and its Member States see the National Legislation Project as a key instrument to help Parties ensuring effective implementation and enforcement of the Convention, and we congratulate those Parties that have achieved significant progress in that context.
2. We strongly support the adoption of the draft decisions contained in Annex 1 to document 26, as well as the deletion of Decisions 17.58-17.64.
3. As just suggested in the Secretariat’s introduction, we would call for some more clarity about the timelines for Parties with legislation in category 2 or 3 to report progress to the Secretariat regarding new measures adopted for the effective implementation of the Convention. While we understand that the Secretariat does not consider the development and submission of legislative timetables as an effective tool to help Parties achieving progress, we believe that the draft decisions should explicitly invite these Parties to report progress to the 73rd and 74th meetings of the Standing Committee.
14741/19 LZ/mb 15 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
4. We would be happy to provide draft suggestions to amend proposed Decision 18.AA as presented in Annex 1 of the document.
5. Regarding the suggestions by Niger, our impression is that these are already, at least partly, captured in the draft decisions presented in document 26.
------
Document No: 28 Agenda item: Compliance Assistance Programme Proponent: Secretariat
1. The EU and its Member States believe that compliance assistance is a critical tool to support Parties efforts’ in achieving compliance with the requirements of the Convention. We generally support the set of draft decisions - proposed in Annex 1 to document 28 - aiming at establishing a Compliance Assistance Programme with a view to assisting Parties with long- standing difficulties in achieving compliance with the Convention and implementing related recommendations of the Standing Committee.
2. At the same time, we would like to express concerns about the significant budget implications arising from the creation of the Programme. We would invite the Secretariat to reconsider the tentative budget foreseen to create the Programme and to ensure that the associated costs remain manageable. We further note that an alternative could be for the Secretariat to look into the possibility of funding – at least parts – of the Programme under the external budget of the Convention.
3. This being said, we remain committed to work with other Parties and the Secretariat to ensure effective compliance and related assistance.
------
Document No: 30.2 Agenda item: Compliance in relation to Malagasy ebonies (Diospyros spp.) and palisanders and rosewoods (Dalbergia spp.) - Report of the Standing Committee Proponent: Standing Committee
1. Merci Monsieur le Président. L’UE et ses Etats membres félicitent Madagascar pour ses efforts relatifs à la mise en œuvre des Décisions adoptées à la CoP17. L’UE et ses EM restent pleinement engagés à apporter un appui technique et financier à Madagascar dans la mise en œuvre des Décisions de la CoP, et ce dans la continuité de notre appui au travers de plusieurs projets depuis la CoP17, comme le projet UE FAO FLEGT.
2. L’UE et ses Etats membres continuent à considérer que des progrès supplémentaires restent à accomplir en particulier en ce qui concerne la nécessité pour Madagascar de renforcer ses efforts afin de démanteler les réseaux de trafic et adopter des sanctions, y compris à l’attention des trafiquants de haut niveau. L’UE et ses Etats membres soutiennent l’adoption des nouvelles Décisions présentées au sein de l’Annexe 1 du document 30.2.
14741/19 LZ/mb 16 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
3. Nous restons néanmoins préoccupés par le fait qu’il y ait eu extrêmement peu de temps au Comité Permanent 70 pour considérer ces projets de Décisions et nous suggérons qu’un petit groupe de rédaction pourrait permettre de finaliser les Décisions figurant dans le document 30.2. Nous sommes également préoccupés par le fait que ces Décisions focalisent en particulier sur une potentielle vente internationale des stocks de bois précieux à court terme, alors que les Parties devraient de notre point de vue donner le même niveau d’importance aux différents aspects des Décisions proposées. Nous invitons Madagascar ainsi que l’ensemble des Parties à se focaliser sur la nécessité d’un renforcement de la lutte contre les trafics. Nous encourageons également toutes les Parties à mettre en œuvre l’actuelle recommandation du Comité Permanent de suspendre le commerce.
4. Nous souhaiterions par conséquent proposer des amendements aux projets de Décision 18.AA, 18.BB et 18.EE. Sur la base des échanges que nous avons eus avec Madagascar en marge de la présente réunion, nous proposons d’intégrer aux Décisions une référence à une possible collaboration avec le consortium ICCWC dans les Décisions 18.AA et 18.BB, ainsi que la suppression du paragraphe b de la Décision 18.AA qui nous semble mettre un accent disproportionné sur le plan d’utilisation des stocks de bois précieux alors que Madagascar aura très certainement besoin d’un appui à la mise en œuvre de toutes les composantes de la Décision 18.BB dans les années à venir. Nous suggérons également que, dans la continuité des travaux scientifiques réalisés sur les espèces de Dalbergia et Diospyros de Madagascar, et au regard des publications scientifiques les plus récentes, Madagascar pourrait souhaiter envisager d’étudier la pertinence d’un futur transfert à l’Annexe I des espèces les plus menacées. Nous aurions également des suggestions supplémentaires à faire concernant les sanctions à l’attention des trafiquants de haut niveau, la sécurisation des stocks de bois précieux et le développement d’un plan d’utilisation. Dans la continuité de l’intervention de Madagascar, nous proposons aussi que la Décision 18.EE intègre une recommandation à l’attention du Secrétariat en ce qui concerne la publication d’une Notification demandant aux éventuels pays de destination de cargaisons de bois illégaux de Madagascar de prendre les mesures nécessaires, et ce en lien avec les informations partagées par Singapour lors du Comité Permanent 71. Nous serions heureux de vous soumettre par écrit nos suggestions de modification des Décisions et restons par ailleurs pleinement engagés à poursuivre notre coopération technique et financière avec Madagascar.
18.AA À l’adresse des Parties et autres partenaires concernés
Les Parties et partenaires concernés, comme l’Organisation internationale des bois tropicaux (OIBT), l’Organisation des Nations Unies pour l’alimentation et l’agriculture (FAO), le Consortium international de lutte contre la criminalité liée aux espèces sauvages (ICCWC) et autres organisations intergouvernementales et non-gouvernementales sont invités à: a) imposer toutes les mesures qui sont recommandées par le Comité permanent de la CITES relatives au commerce des spécimens de Diospyros spp. et Dalbergia spp. de Madagascar ; b) le cas échéant, collaborer avec Madagascar pour la mise en œuvre des parties convenues (inventaires, c.à.d. étapes 1 et 2 de la Phase 1) du plan d’utilisation pour la gestion de stocks de bois de spécimens de ces espèces de Madagascar ; et c) b) fournir une assistance technique et financière en appui à l’application des décisions 18.BB à 18.EE.
14741/19 LZ/mb 17 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
18.BB À l’adresse de Madagascar
Madagascar: a) continue d’identifier les principales espèces possédant une valeur commerciale des genres Dalbergia et Diospyros de Madagascar, en coopération avec le Secrétariat et les partenaires concernés, tels que l’Organisation internationale des bois tropicaux (OIBT), l’Organisation des Nations Unies pour l’alimentation et l’agriculture (FAO), le Consortium international de lutte contre la criminalité liée aux espèces sauvages (ICCWC) et autres organisations intergouvernementales et non gouvernementales ; b) continue de progresser dans l’élaboration des avis de commerce non préjudiciable pour les espèces possédant une valeur commerciale des genres Dalbergia et Diospyros, y compris dans la mise en œuvre de mécanismes de suivi appropriés, et de présenter des rapports sur les progrès accomplis aux futures sessions du Comité pour les plantes ; c) pour les espèces identifiées conformément au paragraphe a), établit, en collaboration avec le Secrétariat CITES, un quota d’exportation de précaution fondé sur des avis de commerce non préjudiciable scientifiquement fiables ; d) sur la base de la mise en œuvre des paragraphes a à c, considérer si certaines espèces des genres Dalbergia and Diospyros de Madagascar pourraient bénéficier d’un transfert à l’Annexe I dans le futur; d e) continue à produire du matériel d’identification permettant d’identifier le bois et les produits d’espèces des genres Dalbergia et Diospyros de Madagascar ; e f) pour les espèces identifiées conformément au paragraphe a), renforce significativement au niveau national le contrôle et les mesures de lutte contre l’exploitation forestière et l’exportation illégales, y compris par des saisies, des enquêtes, des arrestations, des poursuites et des sanctions, y compris à l’encontre des trafiquants de haut niveau ; f g) sécurise les stocks de Dalbergia et Diospyros de Madagascar et soumet au Comité permanent des actualisations régulières des inventaires vérifiés d’au moins un tiers des stocks de Dalbergia et Diospyros de Madagascar, et de ces stocks, ainsi qu’un plan pour une utilisation à l’échelle nationale, basé sur des mécanismes de contrôle transparents et indépendants, pour examen, approbation et orientations complémentaires ; g h) rend compte au Comité pour les plantes des progrès réalisés dans l’application des paragraphes a) à e) de la présente décision ; et au Comité permanent des progrès réalisés dans l’application des paragraphes f) et g) de la présente décision ; et à la Conférence des Parties lors de sa 19ème session des progrès réalisés dans l’application de cette décision.
18.EE À l’adresse du Secrétariat
Le Secrétariat : a) aide Madagascar, les Parties concernées, le Comité permanent et le Comité pour les plantes, à appliquer les décisions 18.AA à 18.DD; b) sous réserve de financement externe, aide par des activités adaptées de renforcement des capacités à Madagascar et dans les pays de transit et de destination concernés par le commerce de spécimens de Diospyros spp. et Dalbergia spp. de Madagascar, incluant les activités liées à la Décision 18.AA; et
14741/19 LZ/mb 18 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
c) émet une notification demandant aux pays destinataires potentiels de cargaisons de spécimens illégaux de Diospyros spp. et Dalbergia spp. de Madagascar à saisir ces spécimens et à adopter les sanctions appropriées à l’encontre des trafiquants; et c d) fournit des rapports sur les progrès de l’application de la présente décision au Comité pour les plantes et au Comité permanent, selon que de besoin.
------
Document No: 31 Agenda item: Domestic markets for frequently illegally traded specimens Proponent: Standing Committee
1. Thank you Chair, the EU and its Member States, support the amendments to Resolution Conf. 10.10 (Rev. CoP17) proposed by the Standing Committee. We concur that Parties that close their domestic ivory markets should enhance their border controls with neighbouring countries that have not taken similar measures in order to prevent a potential shift of ivory trafficking.
2. We also support the draft revised Decisions 17.87 and 17.88, including the changes proposed by the secretariat, that will allow to carry out the second phase of the study regarding domestic controls of specimens of CITES-listed species, other than elephant ivory, for which international trade is predominantly illegal. We concur with the Standing Committee's recommendations under paragraph 25 of the document which suggests a list of key species on which the study should focus, though we think it should include reptiles in general and not only turtles and tortoises as we have notice an exponential increase of the illegal trade in other species of reptiles.
------
Document No: 32 Agenda item: Enforcement matters Proponent: Secretariat
1. Thank you Chair, the EU and its Member States, support the adoption of the draft decisions in Annex 1, including the changes and the new decision proposed by the USA. We concur that the Integrity Guide for Wildlife Management Agencies should be promoted amongst Parties and support also the creation of a Task Force on illegal trade in specimens of CITES-listed tree species.
2. We support the adoption of the proposed amendment to Resolution Conf. 11.3 (Rev. CoP17) on Compliance and enforcement, and support the need to ensure regular updates of the electronic directory of laboratories that conduct wildlife forensic testing.
3. We also agree to delete 17.83 and 17.84, as well as Decision 17.85, paragraph b).
14741/19 LZ/mb 19 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
4. Finally, as we note that CoP18 Doc. 25 on Review of Decisions proposed the deletion of paragraph a) of Decision 17.85, we also agree that the entire Decision 17.85 should be repealed, if both proposals were approved.
------
Document No: 33.1 Agenda item: Combating wildlife cybercrime - Report of the Secretariat Proponent: Secretariat
1. Thank you Chair, the EU and its Member States want to thanks the Secretariat for this report in CoP18 Doc. 33.1 and support the proposed new decisions.
2. We welcome the recent development of capacity by the INTERPOL Global Complex for Innovation in providing technical support and guidance to Parties, and we encourage Parties to make use of such support as suggested under Notification No. 2019/042.
------
Document No: 33.2 Agenda item: Combating wildlife cybercrime - Report of the Standing Committee Proponent: Standing Committee
1. Referring to Document CoP18 Doc. 33.2, the EU and its Member States want to support the proposed amendments to Resolution Conf. 11.3 (Rev. COP17) on Compliance and enforcement,. with small amendments related to paragraphs 11 f) and g).
2. With regard to paragraph 11 f) we propose to delete “requires the national points of contact under paragraph d) to” .and leave the rest of the paragraph like it is. We think this paragraph should not be directed to the national points of contact because this recommendation should be directed to the Parties.
3. Thus the paragraph 11 f) would read as follows: 11. Recommends that Parties: f) identify key contacts at online technology and data companies that can facilitate the provision of information upon request from Parties in support of investigations;
4. And we also propose to amend Paragraph 11 g) as follows: g) engage online platforms to: i) introduce and publish polices to address and prevent the use of such platforms for illegal trade in wildlife including measures to ensure compliance with such policies; ii) ensure that such policies are presented as clearly and visibly as possible; iii) encourage them to inform their users about illegal online trade in wildlife, by using targeted alerts and other technology to make users aware of relevant laws and website policies;
14741/19 LZ/mb 20 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
5. On the Standing Committee proposal to renew Decision 17.92, we agree with the Secretariat's proposal to adopt a new decision, incorporating the provisions of both Decisions 17.92 and 15.57, to avoid duplication. We therefore support the deletion of Decisions 17.92 and 15.57 and the adoption of draft Decision 18.CC, as proposed by the Secretariat.
6. On the Standing Committee proposal to renew Decision 17.93, we agree to replace this Decision with draft Decision 18.DD, as proposed by the Secretariat.
7. And we support also the adoption of draft Decision 18.EE, as suggested by the Secretariat.
8. On the Standing Committee proposal to adopt a new Decision on the CITES Glossary and the new webpage on Wildlife crime linked to the Internet on the CITES website, we agree with the Secretariat that it may not be absolutely necessary to adopt a new Decision, but we would nonetheless not oppose the adoption of the Decision if some other Parties actively request it.
------
Document No: 34 Agenda item: Wildlife crime enforcement support in West and Central Africa Proponent: Secretariat
1. Thank you Chair.
2. The EU and its Member States fully share the evaluation presented by the Secretariat and the Chair of the Standing Committee. We are concerned about the detrimental effects of wildlife crime and the lack of effective implementation of CITES in a large number of Parties in West and Central Africa. We therefore strongly support the adoption of the recommendations and draft Decisions as presented in document CoP18 Doc. 34.
3. The EU and its Member States remain therefore committed to closely scrutinize consignments of CITES-listed species imported from countries in the region, and to continue their dialogue with relevant exporting countries.
4. We also recognize the importance, and support the initiatives aiming at tackling illegal wildlife trade in West and Central Africa. Over recent years, the EU and its Member States have made significant efforts to provide capacity-building support to a large number of Parties in West and Central Africa, such as through the Minimising the Illegal Killing of Elephants and other Endangered Species (MIKES) project, by supporting the International Consortium on Combating Wildlife Crime (ICCWC), as well as by supporting the CITES Tree species programme, to quote a few. We are encouraged by the progress achieved thanks to these projects over the last years, and we remain committed to support the efforts of West and Central African countries to tackle wildlife trafficking.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 21 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Document No: 35 Agenda item: Disposal of confiscated specimens Proponent: Standing Committee
1. Thank you Chair.
2. The EU and its Member States regard Decisions 17.118 and 17.119 directed to the Secretariat and the Standing Committee as implemented and strongly support the deletion, and - as the way forward - we strongly support the adoption of the new draft Decisions directed to the Secretariat and Parties as reflected in Annex I of CoP18 Doc. 35.
3. The collection by the Secretariat and the use by Parties of existing species-specific guidance on the disposal of specimens will be beneficial. Moreover, we would like to encourage Parties to more actively develop and implement effective mechanisms to recover the costs of confiscation, custody and disposal of live specimen.
4. This will be instrumental to overcoming the financial constraints, identified by the CITES questionnaire as the biggest challenge which Parties face with respect to this matter, leading ultimately to better managing the disposal of confiscated specimens.
5. The EU and its Member States are pleased that the Secretariat already takes this into account in providing legislative advice and guidance to Parties, where relevant and appropriate, as indicated in CoP18 working document 26 with reference to Res. Conf. 17.8 on ‘Disposal of illegally traded and confiscated specimens of CITES-listed species‘.
------
Document No: 36 Agenda item: Storage and management of illegal trade data collected through the Parties’ annual illegal trade reports Proponent: Standing Committee
1. Thank you Chair. The EU and its Member States want to underline their overall support to the need for a more systematic storage and management of illegal trade data collected through annual illegal trade reports as a key element to support the development of appropriate law enforcement responses to wildlife crime.
14741/19 LZ/mb 22 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
2. Nonetheless we share the Secretariat’s concerns as to the limited benefit of such a database if only a limited number of Parties actually report and provide data. We propose therefore a draft Decision to encourage Parties to more systematically submit annual illegal trade reports, in line with Resolution Conf. 11.17 (Rev. CoP17) on National reports. While acknowledging that Resolution Conf. 11.17 (Rev. CoP17) already requests Parties to submit their annual illegal trade reports, the response rate of Parties remains disappointing. It is therefore of key importance to remind Parties of the need to submit their annual illegal trade reports via a specific CoP Decision. Such a Decision could also request the Secretariat to issue a Notification to remind Parties of the importance of submitting their annual illegal trade reports. We could submit wording afterwards.
3. While sharing the Secretariat’s view that funding needs to be secured to ensure the long-term maintenance and viability of the database, we express concerns about the implications on the CITES trust fund. Invite therefore the CITES Secretariat and the UN Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) to consider funding the database via the external budget of the Convention at this stage. And perhaps this issue could be re-visited at the next CoP if necessary. We suggest also a small textual correction to the changes proposed by the Secretariat to draft Decision 18.AA, that will read as follows:
Proposed changes to the draft Decision proposed by the Secretariat:
18.AA The Secretariat shall, subject to the availability of external funding, contract UNODC to establish, host and maintain a database for the storage and management of illegal trade data collected through annual illegal trade reports, meeting the requirements outlined in the detailed proposal prepared by UNODC, as presented in the Annex 1 to document SC70 Doc. 26.3 CoP18 Doc. 30 36 on Annual illegal trade reports. […]
------
Document No: 38 Agenda item: Designation and roles of Management Authorities Proponent: Secretariat
1. Thank you Chair. The EU and Member States would like to thank the Secretariat and working group members for all their efforts drafting this proposal.
2. In general, we support the proposed Resolution on ‘Designation and roles of Management Authorities’.
3. We support the aims of the Resolution to capture the various functions of Management Authorities in one place. We are mindful that Parties have a range of administrative, legal and constitutional arrangements to implement the Convention.
14741/19 LZ/mb 23 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
4. We understand that the intention is for the Resolution to work well for all Parties and we do not consider that we need to change established practice where this is functional. For example in respect of permitting issues, the practice is that the designated Management Authority who issued the permit communicates with the Secretariat and other Parties on permit queries, and we consider the Resolution should reflect this.
5. We also propose refinements to the language, for example to more closely reflect the nature of provisions in the Convention or in Resolutions which we are referring to in this Resolution.
6. Accordingly, we propose a number of amendments to the draft Resolution which we will provide in writing to the Secretariat.
------
Document No: 39 Agenda item: Guidance for making legal acquisition findings Proponent: Standing Committee
1. Thank you Mr Chair. The European Union and its Member States strongly support the proposal by the Standing Committee to adopt a Resolution on legal acquisition findings.
2. As indicated by Norway, a key requirement under the Convention is the verification of the legal origin of specimens to be exported. We appreciate in particular that this Resolution is filling a gap in providing guidelines for this. We trust that the Resolution will provide very useful guidance to Parties in verifying the legality of acquisition before the issuance of permits, for example by applying a risk-based approach. We would also like to thank the Secretariat for their support in organizing the 2018 international workshop on legal acquisition findings in Brussels, hosted by the European Union.
3. Exporting states play the key role in the making of ‘Legal Acquisition Findings’. At the same time, importing states have also an active role to play in ensuring - in co-operation with the exporting states - that trade occurs only when specimens were legally acquired. In our view, the Resolution clearly identifies the tasks of importing countries through its several cross- references to other relevant CITES resolutions. Together with the draft amendments to existing CITES resolutions as presented under document CoP18 Doc. 40 on ‘Due diligence by CITES Parties and obligations of importing countries’, we believe that this new Resolution on Legal Acquisition Findings represents an essential step to improve the effectiveness of the Convention.
4. We also thank the Secretariat for the set of proposed Decisions regarding activities aimed at supporting future implementation of the Resolution. We support the adoption of these draft Decisions (as presented in Document CoP18 Doc. 39). However, we propose a minor correction to Decision 18BB, paragraph a). It should be amended to refer to paragraph a) of Decision 18AA, so that it reads: “issue a notification to the Parties requesting input pursuant to paragraph b) a) of Decision 18.AA”.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 24 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Document No: 40 Agenda item: Due diligence by CITES Parties and obligations of importing countries Proponent: United States
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. The EU and its Member States support in general the amendments to Resolution Conf. 11.3 (Rev. CoP17) on compliance and enforcement, as proposed by the United States. These amendments will help to clarify the obligations of importing Parties, when verifying the validity of permits and exercising due diligence to ensure legal trade.
2. However, we would like to propose a few changes to the amendments to Resolution Conf. 11.3 (Rev. CoP17) as presented in document CoP18 Doc. 40. As regards paragraph 1 of the Resolution, we understand that the intention is to capture the legal obligations, as well as the other provisions in Resolution Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP17) on Permits and certificates. To more clearly reflect the nature and range of relevant measures, we propose the following changes to paragraph 1 and subparagraph 1 a):
1. REMINDS all Parties of their obligation to verify the validity of CITES documents accompanying shipments of CITES-listed specimens, and of the need to implement commitments made in Resolution Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP17), including at a minimum:
a) ensuring checking that all of the information listed in Annex 1, Information that should be included in CITES permits and certificates, to Resolution Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP17) is included on the document;
3. We also have comments on the section ‘Comments of the Secretariat’ of document CoP18 Doc. 40:
o Regarding the Secretariat’s comments in D. ii) on Paragraph 2 a) of Resolution Conf. 11.3 (Rev CoP17), we oppose the full deletion of references made to “other CITES- required finding” and “other required CITES finding”. We would instead support the Secretariat’s alternative proposal to replace these references with the broader term “CITES requirement (s)”;
o Considering the Secretariat’s comments in D. iii) regarding the possibility for Parties to take stricter measures with regard to specific transactions: we propose to maintain Paragraph 2 a) v) as proposed by the United States but with one change: we suggest replacing the words ‘where possible’ with ‘if needed’. The text in Paragraph 2 a) v) would then read: ‘v) where possible if needed, make use of the provisions of Article XIV, paragraph 1 (a), of the Convention to take stricter measures with regard to that transaction.
o We could support the proposal just made by the United States for the Standing Committee to further review the Res. Conf. 11.3 (Rev COP17).
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 25 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Document No: 41 Agenda item: Electronic systems and information technologies Proponent: Standing Committee
1. Thank you, Chair. On behalf of the European Union and its Member States, I want to thank the working group and its chair for their hard work so far. This work was very valuable for the further steps the CITES Parties now have to take.
2. We believe that it is important that we make progress in bringing the permitting system under CITES up to speed, by using the available technological developments, for example by implementing solutions and standards for the exchange of electronic permits and certificates between Parties (EPIX) and possibly - in the future - by using Blockchain-related technologies. This is a significant challenge for all the Parties, which we are experiencing also in the European Union. In this process, it is essential to take into account the requirements and needs of all authorities involved, such as CITES Management authorities or customs, as well as the demands of the stakeholders.
3. Therefore, the EU and its Member States support the draft decisions proposed by the Standing Committee, as amended and complemented by the Secretariat, including the draft decisions on authentication and control of permits. We think that the approach outlined by the Secretariat can help to find a global and viable solution for implementing the electronic permit systems.
4. To ensure a swift initiation of this process, we would invite the Standing Committee in its first meeting after the CoP to discuss how to best organise this in the short term until the next meeting of the Conference of the Parties, but also in the medium-term, should the process require more time.
5. We would also recommend that the Standing Committee looks closely into the cost implications of the proposed decisions, as outlined in Annex 3 to the present document.
------
Document No: 43 Agenda item: Specimens produced from synthetic or cultured DNA Proponent: Standing Committee
1. Thank you Chair.
2. The EU and its Member States consider this subject to be of high importance. We acknowledge the sensitivity of this issue and the need for a precautionary approach.
14741/19 LZ/mb 26 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
3. This is a difficult and often polarised topic and we believe that it would be beneficial to have regard to work that has been done and is ongoing in other international fora, such as the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), in particular the CBD’s protocols of Cartagena and Nagoya. We note in particular the opportunity to collaborate with regard to CBD Decision 14/19 on Synthetic Biology adopted in November 2018. It highlights the need for broad and regular horizon scanning, monitoring and assessment of the most recent technological developments, to review new information regarding the potential positive and negative impacts of synthetic biology.
4. We believe that it is important to continue the discussions on matters that are relevant to CITES. While we accepted the change to "biotechnology" as the new working title for the process, we feel that this should not prejudge the scope or direction of any future operational measures under CITES.
5. We support the adoption of the draft decisions, including the amendments by the Secretariat, but we consider that a drafting change is needed to Decision 18.CC a) so that it reads:
"discuss whether and how to apply the term “readily recognizable part or derivative” to trade in products of biotechnology, which might potentially affect international trade in CITES- listed specimens in a way that would threaten their survival."
As currently drafted, the decision seems to assume that the Convention should apply to biotechnology products, which are currently not regulated by CITES. This may be a premature assumption with far reaching consequences for the regulatory scope of CITES. In our view, the intention of the draft Decisions should not be to expand the scope of the Convention but to facilitate further discussion and keep matters open.
We are not in a position to support the proposals just made by the US. Very similar proposals were extensively discussed at SC70, and our assessment is still that such an amendment to Res. 9.6 – or an interim decision to the same effect – would be premature.
------
Document No: 44.1 Agenda item: Definition of the term 'appropriate and acceptable destinations' - Report of the Standing Committee Proponent: Standing Committee
1. Thank you, Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We thank the working group and the Animals Committee for their work on the development of the non-binding guidance for determining whether recipients of living specimens of CITES Appendix-I species are suitably equipped to house and care for them.
3. In Sochi the Standing Committee agreed to go forward with this proposed guidance as well as a set of decisions that is now submitted for adoption.
14741/19 LZ/mb 27 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
4. We noted the comments made by the Secretariat and we agree with their suggested amendments to the non-binding guidance presented in annex 4 and draft Decisions in Annex 5 of Doc. 44.
------
Document No: 44.2 Agenda item: Definition of the term 'appropriate and acceptable destinations' - International trade in live African elephants: Proposed revision of Resolution Conf. 11.20 (Rev. CoP17) on Definition of the term ‘appropriate and acceptable destinations’ Proponent: Burkina Faso, Jordan, Lebanon, Liberia, the Niger, Nigeria, the Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic
1. Thank you, Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We have supported the revised non-binding guidance as well as the set of decisions proposed in the annexes of Doc.44.1.
3. However, we note that additional revisions are being proposed to Resolution Conf 11.20 (Rev CoP17) in Doc. 44.2, to restrict future destinations for live elephants to in situ conservation programmes within their natural range. Whilst we agree that in situ locations may be the most appropriate destination in many, if not most cases, the EU and its Member States consider that there may be exceptional cases where ex situ conservation programmes can also have their benefits and excluding this option entirely seems too restrictive.
4. Furthermore the EU and its Member States consider that introducing this restriction would pre-empt the assessment that should be made by the Scientific Authorities, taking into account the new set of guidance being proposed for adoption in Annex 4 of Doc 44.1 . It might also be problematic to apply this new restriction when dealing with relocation of wild-caught animals that are already in ex-situ locations.
5. We therefore oppose the adoption of Doc. 44.2. and suggest that we should wait for the implementation and outcome of the decisions 18BB 18DD and 18EE, which include tasking the Animals Committee with preparing non-binding best practice guidance on how to determine whether “the trade would promote in situ conservation” and discuss this issue again based on the recommendations of the AC and SC at CoP19.
14741/19 LZ/mb 28 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Following the discussions at CoP 18 the following statements were made at the Plenary session:
Procedural motion to reopen the debate in plenary
1. Thank you Chair. I speak on behalf of the European Union and its Member States. We would like to reopen the debate in this plenary on document 44.2 and therefore submit a procedural motion under rule 21.1. The transfer of live elephants is an important matter for many parties, including the European Union and its Member States. This item was covered on the first day of Committee I and we feel we did not have sufficient time to discuss with the proponents and other parties. We unsuccessfully submitted to the consideration of the Chair of Committee I a point of order asking for more time among parties but a vote was held. While we do not question the legality of the vote in Committee, we observe that only around a third of the Parties of the Convention took part in it as they were not prepared for different reasons.
2. In the meantime we have informally engage extensively with parties and stakeholders on this matter and are confident that we have a way forward on this important matter that improves the outcome and can be supported by the proponents and many other parties. We therefore request this item to be reopened.
Speaking notes in the plenary debate
1. Thank you Chair. The first priority for the European Union and its Member States is the conservation of the African elephants. We are a strong partner of African countries on this matter. We thank the proponents for their resolution and agree with the overarching objective to stop the transfer of live elephants from the wild. The European Union has not imported any single live Africa elephant in the last decade and we have no intention of doing so.
2. However, as it stands the resolution would have unintended negative consequences for the conservation and the welfare of both individuals and populations of African Elephants. We would like to introduce a few minimal changes to address these unintended negative consequences whilst keeping the general objective of the proposal.
3. We have identified three situations of concern:
o The proposal exclude checks by CITES Scientific or Management Authorities on movements among range states to assess whether the destination for the elephant is suitable and promotes in-situ conservation, we believe all movements of African Elephants should require these checks; o Ex-situ to ex-situ movement of older animals originally taken from the wild should be possible with management and scientific oversight. This is essential so that old animals currently in captivity will not be required to be returned to the wild where they would be unable to survive, or will have to remain in poor conditions, or would need to be put down. We are certain that this is not the intended outcome from the proposal but as originally drafted may result in such an outcome. We would therefore like to remove any ambiguity in this regard.
14741/19 LZ/mb 29 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
o We would like to introduce the possibility to accept transfer to ex-situ locations in very exceptional circumstances, if it can be demonstrated, in consultation with the Animals Committee, that there are in-situ conservation benefits to the African Elephant. This process would involve consultation of relevant experts, such as the IUCN African Elephant Specialist Group, and will provide the necessary transparency to any proposal to export to live elephants to ex-situ locations in exceptional circumstances. To be clear, we would expect the use of this exception to be minimal.
4. These changes will also make the document 44.2 more consistent with the process agreed by consensus under document 44.1.
Preamble (last para):
FURTHER ACKNOWLEDGING that the only certain best way to promote in situ conservation of live wild African elephants is through in situ conservation programmes within their wild natural range
Operative section
1. Agrees that where the term “appropriate and acceptable destinations” appears in an annotation to the listing of Loxodonta africana in Appendix II of the Convention with reference to the trade in live elephants* taken from the wild, this term shall be defined to mean in situ conservation programmes or secure areas in the wild, within the species’ natural and historical range in Africa, except in exceptional circumstances where, in consultation with the Animals Committee, through its Chair with the support of the Secretariat, and in consultation with the IUCN African Elephant Specialist Group, it is considered that a transfer to ex-situ locations will provide demonstrable in-situ conservation benefits for African elephants, or in the case of temporary transfers in emergency situations.
* Excluding elephants that were in ex situ locations at the time of the adoption of this resolution at CoP18
2. FURTHER AGREES that, where the term “appropriate and acceptable destinations” appears in an annotation to the listing of a species in Appendix II of the Convention with reference to the trade in all other live animals this term shall be defined to mean destinations where:
a) the Management and Scientific Authority of the State of import is satisfied that the proposed recipient of a living specimen is suitably equipped to house and care for it sustainably; and b) the Management and Scientific Authorities of the State of import and the State of export are satisfied that the trade would promote in situ conservation;
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 30 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Document No: 45 Agenda item: Non-detriment findings Proponent: Animals Committee in collaboration with the Chair of the Plants Committee
1. The European Union and its Member States consider non-detriment findings as one of the core elements of the Convention. NDF are crucial to the implementation of CITES by assessing whether trade in CITES-listed species is sustainable.
2. In consequence and in line with Article XIV the European Union has adopted stricter domestic measures, one of which makes NDF mandatory also for imports of specimens listed on Appendix II into the EU. The EU and its Member States are constantly working on improvements of science based non-detriment findings and the respective guidance.
3. We therefore welcome the initiative of the Secretariat, the Plants and the Animals Committees to further improve exchange, capacities and guidance on NDF in order to address gaps and Parties’ needs.
4. The “International Expert Workshop on CITES Non-Detriment Findings” in 2008 in Cancun/Mexico has been a landmark in the evolution of non-detriment findings, paving the way also to Res. Conf.16.7 (Rev. CoP17) on non-detriment findings.
5. A second international expert workshop on non-detriment findings well prepared and based on a thorough gap analyses, as suggested in the working document, will certainly continue this successful path.
6. The European Union and its Member States stand ready to contribute expertise and experience to this process and support the adoption of the draft decisions as suggested in Annex 1 of Working Document CoP 18 Doc45.
------
Document No: 46 Agenda item: Quotas for leopard hunting trophies Proponent: Standing Committee
1. Thank you Mr/Madam Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We support the amendments to Res. Conf. 10.14 (Rev. CoP16) proposed by the Secretariat regarding deletion of the quotas of Kenya and Malawi from the table in paragraph 1 a) of the Resolution as recommended by SC (paragraph 13).
3. We also agree to prolong the draft decisions on Quotas for leopard hunting trophies in line with Annex 3, which include the revised decisions by the SC on renewal of Decisions 17.114 to 17.117 for Botswana, Central African Republic and Ethiopia.
14741/19 LZ/mb 31 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
4. However, recognising the fact that Ethiopia and Central African Republic have not provided sufficient information to demonstrate that their export quotas are not detrimental and, as yet, no review has been submitted by Botswana, we propose that export quotas of CAR, Botswana and Ethiopia be temporarily suspended, until reviewed by Animals Committee and Standing Committee and it has been determined that these quotas are still set at levels which are not detrimental to the survival of the species in the wild.
5. This can be achieved, for example, by modifications to the draft Decision CoP 18.AA, which could be amended to read:
Parties which have quotas established under Resolution Conf. 10.14 (Rev. CoP18) on Quotas for leopard hunting trophies and skins for personal use, and which did not yet provide the basis for their determination that their current quota is not detrimental to the Animals Committee (Botswana, the Central African Republic and Ethiopia), are requested to review these quotas and consider whether these quotas are still set at levels which are non- detrimental to the survival of the species in the wild, and to share the outcomes of the review and the basis for the determination that the quota is not detrimental, with temporarily suspend exports and introduce a zero export quota until the relevant information has been submitted for review and recommendations have been made by the Animals Committee at its 31st meeting and confirmed by the Standing Committee at its 73rd meeting.
6. We are of the view that further discussion is needed on the export quotas maintained in Res. Conf. 10.14 (Rev. CoP16). We are concerned that the export quotas in Resolution 10.14 (CoP16) remain significantly higher than anticipated export levels or current harvest quotas, as determined by the non-detriment findings. Our preference would be to have quotas published in Resolution Conf 10.14 (CoP16) that reflect sustainable harvest levels. We recommend that any future quota evaluation should be based on actual harvest levels taking into account all mortality sources affecting the wild population of the species, including mortality due to illegal killing – in line with Res. Conf. 17.9.
7. We also support the amendments to the preamble of Res. Conf. 9.21 (Rev. CoP13) proposed by the Secretariat in Annex 2, and support the general principle behind the new paragraph (2) included at the end of the operational part of the Resolution. However, we consider that some changes are needed in the draft text, to indicate a specified time frame for the review process. Furthermore, we suggest that the review process should also direct the range States or the Animals and the Standing Committees to report to the CoP when concerns arise or changes to the ‘approved quota’ are deemed necessary.
Draft alternative text/amendments Res. Conf. 9.21 (Rev. CoP13):
INSTRUCTS the Standing Committee and the Animals Committee to keep under review quotas for species included in Appendix I established by the Conference of the Parties at least every 6 years, or sooner if determined necessary, for example if new scientific or management data have emerged to indicate that the population of the species in the range State concerned can no longer sustain the agreed quota, consult with that range State in order to find a solution to the concerns raised and make recommendations to the Conference of Parties with respect to the published quotas accordingly.
14741/19 LZ/mb 32 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
8. We would like to take part in a drafting group on this agenda item, should the CoP decide to establish one.
------
Document No: 47 Agenda item: Enhancement of quotas for markhor hunting trophies Proponent: Pakistan
1. The population of markhor in Pakistan seems to be stable or increasing, and the EU and its Member States took note of the change of the IUCN classification from EN to NT
2. We agree with the conclusions by IUCN which acknowledge the importance of protected areas and hunting management for the protection of this species. We also agree that the low quota may prevent extension of community-based conservation into still unmanaged areas.
3. Increasing the hunting quota is low risk with important benefits to the species conservation. Therefore, the EU and its Member States are open to support the suggested increase in the quotas for the markhor hunting trophies.
------
Document No: 48 Agenda item: Black rhino hunting trophies: export quota for South Africa Proponent: South Africa
1. Thank you Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We recognize the continuous efforts of South Africa in the conservation and management of its population of black rhinoceroses. The proponent has demonstrated good practices both in the general management for this species as well as the management of its trophy hunting.
3. By increasing, in a modest way, the annual offtake through trophy hunting, additional incentive is created for the private sector to conserve this species and contribute to the species’ range expansion.
4. The proposed new approach would allow for a flexible and adaptable way of setting a scientific based, robust and sustainable quota that may serve as an example for other Parties in similar circumstances.
5. For the sake of clarity at the international level, we welcome the Information document drafted by the proponent and its intention to communicate the yearly quota to the Secretariat for publication on the website.
6. We support the proposal made by South Africa.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 33 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Document No: 49 Agenda item: Implications of the transfer of a species to Appendix I (Trade in “pre- Appendix-I” specimens Proponent: Secretariat (49.1) / Côte d’Ivoire, Nigeria, Senegal (49.2)
1. The EU and its Member States welcome the clear and comprehensive document prepared by the Secretariat. At every meeting of the Conference of the Parties, species are transferred from Appendix III or II to Appendix I and equally frequently, the issue of trade with so called “pre-Appendix-1” specimens occurs. We therefore support the amendments proposed by the Secretariat to Res. Conf. 13.6 and Res. Conf. 12.3 and welcome the clarification that in the case of a species transferred from Appendix III or II to Appendix I, the specimen concerned is subject to the provisions applicable to it at the time of export, re-export or import.
2. This interpretation is in line with the Secretariat’s position during CoP 5 and CoP 7.
3. The EU and its Member States also support the proposed draft Decision 18.AA in Doc. 49.1 directed to the Standing Committee. We think it is helpful that the Standing Committee considers whether guidance is needed in relation to the period of transition. This may be particularly useful in the case of transfers of annotated plant species to Appendix I and the issue of timber species and annotation #5.
4. As regards Doc 49.2, we thank the proponents and we generally agree with their intent, but we support the Secretariat proposal to consider document CoP18 Doc. 49.1 and the recommendations contained therein in place of considering the recommendation in Doc. 49.2.
------
Document No: 50 Agenda item: Amendments to Resolution Conf. 10.13 (Rev. CoP15) on Implementation of the Convention for timber species Proponent: Standing Committee
1. The EU and its Member States generally support the proposed amendments to Resolution Conf. 10.13 (Rev. CoP15) on Implementation of the Convention for timber species.
2. We support the suggestion by the Secretariat to delete paragraph 1f) of Res. Conf. 10.13.
3. Additionally, we propose to include a reference to the need to base Non-Detriment Findings on adequate conversion factors to be added as a new paragraph j) under the section “Regarding the establishment of export quotas for tree species“. This new paragraph could read:
"Parties are encouraged to make use of adequate conversion factors when making Non- Detriment Findings and establishing voluntary annual national export quotas, aiming in particular at converting volumes of traded commodities into volumes of round wood."
4. Finally, we propose some minor amendments.
14741/19 LZ/mb 34 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
5. Firstly, in Annex 1 paragraph 8 of the preamble add 'tree' for consistency, should read:
"NOTING further that the objective of the Convention is to ensure the conservation of wild fauna and flora for this and future generations through the protection of certain tree species against over-exploitation through international trade"
6. Secondly, in Annex 1 paragraph 1 new h) old j) we should add additional knowledge gaps that are a cause of concern, and the text should now read:
(h) the range States pay particular attention to internationally traded tree species within their territories for which the knowledge of the biologyical status, population density and structure and the lack of appropriate sylvicultural techniques requirements gives cause for concern;
7. Thirdly, in Annex 1 paragraph 1 new n) old i) we should add “tree species conservation and livelihoods” in the end to complete the sentence:
"… in Appendices II and III are generally permitted and can be beneficial to tree species conservation and livelihoods."
------
Document No: 51 Agenda item: Stocks and Stockpiles Proponent: Standing Committee
1. Thank you Chair.
2. The EU and its Member States acknowledge and appreciate the work done by the intersessional working group on this subject.
3. We support the continuation of the working group. However, we would propose that the scope of the activities set forth should be focused on issues that clearly obstruct the implementation of the Convention.
4. The working group should refrain from proposing any new tasks for the Secretariat or any additional administrative burden to Parties, such as obligation to declare stockpiles and keep a register at the Secretariat.
------
Document No: 53 Agenda item: Purpose codes on CITES permits and certificates Proponent: Standing Committee
1. Thank you Mr Chair. The EU and its Member States would like to thank the chair and the members of the intersessional working group for their strong commitment and their hard work on trying to find consensus in this difficult task.
14741/19 LZ/mb 35 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
2. We believe that the results of the intersessional working group, which were already accepted by the Standing Committee at SC 70, should be respected and adopted. Therefore, we support the proposal to amend Res. Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP17) on Permits and certificates as set out in Annex 2 of Doc. 53.
3. We see the work on purpose codes as important, and consider that it should continue. However, for the continuation of work during the next intersessional period, we think that the approach as suggested by the Secretariat could be a better way forward than to directly work only in the Standing Committee. The EU and its Member States therefore support the draft decisions 18.AA, 18.BB and 18.CC as suggested by the Secretariat.
4. While the EU and its Member States would have favoured a broader approach as suggested by the Secretariat, we can accept the revised draft decision 14.54 which will allow the working group to continue its work.
------
Document No: 54.2 Agenda item: Identification of CITES-listed tree species Proponent: Plants Committee
1. The EU and its Member States support the new decisions on this important issue and we agree to delete Decisions 17.166 to 17.169.
2. We would like to encourage all Parties to provide financial and capacity support to institutions in their jurisdiction to carry out such work and encourage global collaboration.
3. Furthermore, we would like to encourage collaborations with existing networks, namely with the International Association of Wood Anatomists, the Global Timber Tracking Network and the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime.
4. One of the European Union Member States, Germany, is currently working on a CITESwoodID App to be used on mobile devices and desktop PCs to replace the CD-ROM- version. It is foreseen that relevant CoP decisions will be integrated in future by constant updates of the App.
------
Document No: 54.3 Agenda item: Identification of sturgeons and paddlefish specimens in trade Proponent: Secretariat
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We strongly support the renewal of these Decisions.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 36 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Document No: 55 Agenda item: CITES implementation for trade in medicinal plant species Proponent: Secretariat
1. Medicinal plants, but also aromatic plants, and their international trade pose an important and cross-cutting issue in CITES, including very specific challenges for the implementation of CITES regulations that result from the special characteristics of these species and their trade and supply chains.
2. The EU and its Member States thus agree with the arguments laid out in Doc. 55 constituting a general need for a focused, consolidated and holistic strategy and work plan to improve CITES implementation for medicinal plants.
3. The draft decisions on CITES implementation for trade in medicinal plant species as suggested in Doc. 55 by the Secretariat could be a valuable and useful starting point of a process towards a better understanding of the impact of trade in medicinal plant species.
4. We especially want to highlight the potential of voluntary certification schemes and standards, which shall be reviewed under draft decision 18.AA b) ii), to support CITES implementation in medicinal plants trade. These might cover traceability issues as well as raising public awareness of a sustainable trade of these natural resources. In this context we would like to draw your attention to Information Document xy, submitted by Germany in collaboration with Traffic. The document shows how certification may contribute to the implementation of CITES.
5. However, we believe that the role of Parties and the PC should be strengthened and the valuable workplan which is presented in Information Document CoP18 Inf 11, submitted by the Secretariat should be considered when advising on priorities and activities. The EU and its Member States therefore strongly support the changes made by the representatives of the US.
------
Document No: 56 Agenda item: Simplified procedure for permits and certificates Proponent: Standing Committee
1. Thank you, Chair. The EU and its Member States welcome the progress made in addressing the challenges faced by Parties and other stakeholders with regards to procedures for permits and certificates and we commend the efforts of the working group.
2. We generally support the adoption of the proposed amendments to Resolution Conf. 11.15 (Rev. CoP12) and Resolution Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP17).
14741/19 LZ/mb 37 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
3. However, we propose four changes to the proposed amendments to both Resolutions.
o To Annex 1 on page 12 of document 56, that contains the proposed amendments to Resolution 11.15. In Paragraphs 3 b) and 3 d) where it is proposed to insert the new text ‘and wildlife forensic research laboratories’, we propose to delete the word ‘wildlife’. The rationale behind this deletion is that most forensic research laboratories that undertake this kind of analyses are not explicitly working with wildlife forensics.
o In the proposed new Annex 1 to Resolution 11.15 on page 15 of the document, we propose to insert in row 5 of the column headed ‘Typical size of sample’ the text ‘or less depending on analysis method’, since the mentioned size [3cm x 3cm and 1cm thick] refers only to DNA testing, and often much smaller samples are required (for example, isotope analyses to determine the origin of the ivory typically require a sample of 30 mg).
The text then reads:
. ‘individual samples with or without fixative for ivory: pieces of ivory approximately 3 cm x 3 cm and 1 cm thick or less depending on analysis method, in accordance with ICCWC Guidelines on methods and procedures for ivory and laboratory analysis’
o In Annex 2 on page 16 of the document, we propose to maintain Paragraph 20. b) i) of Resolution 12.3, but we propose the following changes to it: strike ‘may’ from ‘bodies that may benefit’ and replace ‘they may trade’ with ‘are traded’ so that the Paragraph reads:
maintain a register of persons and bodies that benefit from simplified procedures, as well as the species that are traded under the simplified procedures;
o In the proposed new Annex 4 to Resolution 12.3 on page 18 we propose to insert in row 7 of the column headed ‘Typical size of sample’ the text ‘or less depending on analysis method’. This reflects our proposed change to the table in new Annex 1 to Resolution 11.15.
4. And lastly, Chair, as regards to the proposed draft Decisions:
5. While we welcome and support in principle the actions set out in Decision 18.AA in Annex 3 relating to Resolution 11.5, we agree with the Secretariat’s view as expressed in paragraphs D and E to this document that these elements would be better placed in the text of the Resolution 11.15 itself.
6. Regarding Resolution 12.3, we also support the Draft Decision 18.XX suggested by the Secretariat, directing the Secretariat to prepare draft guidelines and undertake other capacity building activities, understanding that any possible training workshops would be subject to external funding.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 38 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Document No: 59.1 Agenda item: Guidance on the term 'artificially propagated' Proponent: Plants Committee
1. The EU and its Member States would like to thank the Plants Committee for providing this document. We are especially grateful to Greg Leach, representative of Oceania to the Plants Committee, who has chaired the respective working group that did the preparatory work for this document and for CoP18Doc59.2. Greg ends his long, committed and successful career in the Plants Committee at this CoP.
2. The EU and its Member States support the Draft Decisions including the amendments proposed by the Secretariat with one minor addition:
3. We suggest that any guidance material on aspects of artificial propagation should be reviewed by the Plants Committee before publication.
4. Furthermore, we suggest that the process of consultancy should have an end date. As the 25th meeting of the Plants Committee is unrealistic, we suggest the 26th meeting of the Plants Committee.
5. Therefore, we propose to complement Draft Decision 18.XX b), now to read: ‘report to the Plants Committee at its 26th meeting on progress with the consultancy; and, after revision by the PC’.
6. In order to reflect the creation of a new source code suggested in CoP18 Doc 59.2 we would highly welcome an update of the ‘Guide to the application of CITES source codes’.
------
Document No: 59.2 Agenda item: Source codes for plant specimens in trade Proponent: Standing Committee, in collaboration with the Chair of the Plants Committee
1. The EU and its Member States would like to thank the Standing Committee and the Chair of the Plants Committee for providing this document.
2. We welcome the new source code. The corresponding NDF requirements are of high priority for our agreement.
3. The EU and its Member States therefore agree with the original document including the draft decisions and amendments to Resolution Conf. 11.11 (Rev. CoP17) and Resolution Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP17) and the proposed way forward by the chair of the plants committee.
4. The valuable amendments made by the Secretariat are also welcome and can be accepted with one exemption and one clarification.
14741/19 LZ/mb 39 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
5. We do not agree with the automatic deletion of the definition of “A” for agarwood producing species in Res. Conf. 16.10 and its replacement with “Y”. The Plants Committee considered after thorough evaluation that a decision on this being pre-mature. With the draft decisions on WD 65 on Agarwood in COM I at this CoP this evaluation stays the same. We therefore suggest to postpone a decision on Res. 16.10.
6. In addition we strongly ask for a clarification that any “determination of NDF for specimens under source code Y”, as suggested in the Secretariats comments under paragraph H) will not result in guidance with separate principals from those laid down in Res. 16.7. Of course we support the inclusion of “Y” into guidance on NDF, especially with the aim to address specific aspects in NDF which may occur in source code Y.
------
Document No: 61 Agenda item: Sturgeons and paddlefish (Acipenseriformes spp.) Proponent: Secretariat
Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
1. We thank the Secretariat, the Chair of the Standing Committee, Japan as Chair of the intersessional working group on country of origin of caviar and the members of the working group (WG). Several EU member states participated in that WG and finally accepted that it was not possible to reach a consensus regarding the definition of ‘country of origin of caviar’.
2. We support this Document on Sturgeons and Paddlefish and its draft decision that would replace Decision 17.185, which can be deleted.
3. The EU and its Member States agree with renewing the mandate for the Standing Committee to look into practical challenges in the implementation of the CITES provisions in light of the recognized shift in source from wild to aquaculture, especially with regard to the “CITES guidelines for a universal labelling system for the trade in and identification of caviar” contained in Annex 1 of Resolution Conf. 12.7 (Rev. CoP17).
------
Document No: 62 Agenda item: Draft decisions on the conservation of amphibians (Amphibia) Proponent: Costa Rica
Thank you Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
The broad range of draft Decisions addressed to Parties, Committees and the Secretariat are mostly not specific for amphibians but would apply to all CITES-listed taxa.
We assume that such a proposal would benefit from prior consideration by AC and SC and a supporting statement.
14741/19 LZ/mb 40 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Hence, we oppose the proposal as it stands but we would be willing to consider a more focused proposal with concrete actions.
------
Document No: 63 Agenda item: Species Specific Matters - Eels (Anguilla spp.) Proponent: AC, SC, Secretariat
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We would like to thank the Animals Committee, Standing Committee and Secretariat for preparing this document and the EU and its Member States support the recommended Decisions outlined in it.
3. We are broadly content with the changes suggested by the Secretariat but some of these changes might need some refinement. If a drafting group is to be created to discuss these, then we would be happy to participate in such a group. [Alternatively chair, we could suggest some changes now (see additional info below).]
4. We were pleased to see the emphasis on collaboration and sharing information. Trade in anguillid eels has become more interlinked and complex and without this collaboration, all eel trade will suffer.
5. As the draft Decisions demonstrate, it is important to gather more information around trade in non-listed eel species to help us all understand the potential threat to other species which could be at risk.
6. While there are still issues to be addressed, it is important to recognise the progress that has been made since the species was listed. Understanding illegal trade in eels has vastly improved, and seizures associated with illegal trade have increased, However, much more remains to be done and we are not complacent. More resources are being put into eel management and people are collaborating better through fora such as CMS and ICES.
7. The EU and its Member States support adoption of the draft Decisions and deletion of Decisions 17.186 to 17.189 as they have been successfully implemented.
------
Document No: 64 Agenda item: Precious corals (Order Antipatharia and family Coralliidae) Proponent: Standing Committee
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States. We would like to thank the Standing Committee for the submission of this document.
14741/19 LZ/mb 41 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
2. The EU and its Member States agree with Amendment of decisions 17.192 and 17.193 to continue the work on this issue.
------
Document No: 66 Agenda item: Trade in Boswellia spp. (Burseraceae) Proponent: Sri Lanka and the United States of America
1. The EU and its Member States very much welcome the document by Sri Lanka and the USA. We are also concerned about the level of global trade in Boswellia species as outlined, especially with regard to data on recent global trends and growing concerns of overharvest for the medicinal, and aromatic plant trade.
2. We agree with the secretariat’s assessment that direct consultation with the range states of Boswellia spp., importing countries and institutions rather than a general CITES notification, along with a listing in Appendix III may be effective in gaining data and information about Boswellia spp. and its trade.
3. We welcome the remit of the project on trade in Boswellia spp. as outlined in Cop 18 inf doc. 53.
4. We support the document presented with the suggested revisions of the draft decisions as proposed by the Secretariat.
------
Document No: 67 Agenda item: Humphead wrasse (Cheilinus undulatus) Proponent: Standing Committee
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States. We would like to thank the Standing Committee for the submission of this document.
2. EU and its Member States agree with the draft decision aiming at providing assistance to the main exporting and importing countries to address remaining implementation challenges.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 42 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Document No: 68.1 Agenda item: Sharks and rays (Elasmobranchii spp.) - Report of the Animals Committee Proponent: Animal Committee
1. We would like to thank the Animals Committee and the CITES Secretariat for providing the reports on sharks and rays.
2. We support the excellent work of the Secretariat in helping Parties to ensure the successful progress of the decisions on sharks and rays and the practical implementation of these new listings.
3. Progress in the development of Non Detriment Findings, identification of shark products in trade, and the availability of guidance has seen high levels of engagement, interest and practical steps being taken by Parties to improve the management of these species.
4. There are still challenges, but we remain committed to supporting, including financially, the implementation of the Convention for sharks, and encourage Parties to fund this important work.
------
Document No: 68.2 Agenda item: Sharks and rays (Elasmobranchii spp.) - Report of the Secretariat Proponent: Secretariat
1. We would like to thank the Animals Committee and the CITES Secretariat for providing the reports on sharks and rays.
2. We support the excellent work of the Secretariat in helping Parties to ensure the successful progress of the decisions on sharks and rays and the practical implementation of these new listings.
3. Progress in the development of Non-Detriment Findings, identification of shark products in trade, and the availability of guidance has seen high levels of engagement, interest and practical steps being taken by Parties to improve the management of these species.
4. There are still challenges, but we remain committed to supporting, including financially, the implementation of the Convention for sharks, and encourage Parties to fund this important work.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 43 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Document No: 69.1 Agenda item: Implementation of Resolution Conf. 10.10 (Rev. CoP17) on Trade in elephant specimens Proponent: Standing Committee / Secretariat
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. First of all, we want to thank the Standing Committee and the Secretariat for this comprehensive report, which provides an update on the implementation of Resolution Conf. 10.10 (Rev. CoP17) on trade in elephant specimens.
3. With regard to the draft decision concerning Stocks and Stockpiles in Annex 1 of the document, we have taken note of the proposal by several Parties contained in working document 69.4 which requests the set-up of an in-session working group to conclude the work on the guidance document on the management of stockpiles. We understand the wish of Parties to see this guidance being finalized, but we do not support the formation of an in- session working group as this is not a task that can be performed during a CoP-meeting. As a compromise the EU and its Member States suggest amending the draft decision 18.AA to delegate the approval of the Guidance document to SC73 and adopting an additional decision directed to the secretariat. If this would not be acceptable, we prefer to adopt the suggested way forward by the Secretariat, namely that it will put the guidance up for approval at CoP19.
18.AA The Standing Committee shall review and consider for approval the practical guidance prepared by the Secretariat for the management of ivory stockpiles, including their disposal, at SC73. and make recommendations as appropriate for consideration at the 19th meeting of the Conference of the Parties.
New decision Directed to the Secretariat: 18.AA bis The Secretariat shall disseminate the practical guidance for the management of ivory stockpiles, including their disposal, once approved by the Standing Committee.
4. On the implementation of the decisions relating to Trade in Asian elephants, we sincerely regret the lack of response to the notification asking Parties involved in the trade in live Asian elephants to provide information to the Secretariat on the implementation of Decision 17.217. We urge relevant Parties to provide the necessary information. We also repeat our concerns with regard to trade in elephant skins and we firmly support the proposal from SC70 to renew Decisions 17.217 and 17.218 with amendments to include the trade in elephant parts and derivatives.
5. The EU and its Member States believe in the relevance and the importance of good implementation of the National Ivory Action Plans. We support all relevant changes to the Guidelines of the NIAPs process as suggested in Annex 3 of Doc. 69.1. We also firmly support the inclusion of Resolution Conf. 10.10 (Rev CoP17) on Trade in elephant specimens in the footnote to paragraph 30 in the Annex to Resolution Conf. 14.3, as proposed in Doc. 24.
14741/19 LZ/mb 44 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
6. The EU and its Member States welcome the draft Terms of Reference for the review of the ETIS programme and we support the text presented in Annex 4 of Doc. 69.1 and also the decision proposed in the addendum to Document 69.1.
7. On the issue of the development of possible approaches to address the financial and operational sustainability of the MIKE and ETIS programmes, the EU and its Member States support draft decisions 18.FF and 18.GG as suggested by the Secretariat.
------
Document No: 69.3 Agenda item: Report on the Elephant Trade Information System (ETIS) Proponent: Secretariat
Thank you Chair. The EU and its Member States thank the Secretariat for this report, which we welcome. We support the Elephant Trade Information System, as it provides relevant analysis that helps significantly the NIAP process. We regret that some Parties have not reported, and call on them to submit the missing reports. We take note of the observations made by some Parties on the need to improve the methodology. We look forward to the upcoming review, to be discussed under agenda item 69.1, that should provide the basis for making further improvements to the system.
------
Document No: 69.4 Agenda item: Ivory stockpiles: IMPLEMENTATION OF RESOLUTION CONF. 10.10 (REV. COP17) ON TRADE IN ELEPHANT SPECIMENS Proponent: Burkina Faso, Chad, Côte d'Ivoire, Gabon, Jordan, Kenya, Liberia, the Niger, Nigeria, the Sudan and Syrian Arab Republic.
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We thank the proponents for this document.
3. As expressed in my previous intervention, we understand the wish of the proponents to see the guidance document on stockpiles adopted as soon as possible. We think that a good way forward has been agreed under agenda item 69.1.
4. With regard to the request of the proponents to gather information on the quantities of any ivory stolen and/or missing from government-held ivory and, where possible, significant privately held stockpiles, we feel this can be a useful exercise.
5. Nevertheless, we agree with the assessment of the Secretariat that such a provision would be better placed in Resolution Conf. 10.10.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 45 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Document No: 69.5 Agenda item: IMPLEMENTING ASPECTS OF RESOLUTION CONF. 10.10 (REV. COP17) ON THE CLOSURE OF DOMESTIC IVORY MARKETS Proponent: Burkina Faso, Côte d’Ivoire, Ethiopia, Gabon, Kenya, Liberia, the Niger, Nigeria and the Syrian Arab Republic
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. The EU and its Member States recognize the problems related to illegal ivory trade, and agree that those domestic markets for ivory that contribute, directly or indirectly to poaching or illegal international trade should be closed. We further support all actions taken to address the problems mentioned in an effective and proportionate way.
3. The EU domestic ivory market is already fully regulated with trade in ivory restricted only to limited exceptions. The trade within the EU is mainly in antique products where the value of the products is related to the age and the craftsmanship of the object. Therefore, the EU market has no demand for new ivory. Nevertheless, in addition to the measures taken recently as described in the response by the European Union and its Member States to CITES Notification 2017/77, we are looking at possible measures to restrict further trade in ivory within and from the EU.
4. The current text on the closing of domestic markets was a delicate compromise found at the last CoP. We have no wish to re-open this debate which has the potential to create division between Parties. We are therefore not in a position to support the current proposal.
5. We are able, however, to support the proposal of the US, which is a good way forward.
------
Document No: 70 Agenda item: Hawksbill turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata) and other marine turtles (Cheloniidae and Dermochelyidae) Proponent: Secretariat
1. Thank you Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. The protection of sea turtles would profit from a rapid implementation of the conservation measures suggested in the report which is available as Information Document 18 and therefore, the EU and Member States support the establishment of a drafting group as proposed by Costa Rica.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 46 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Document No: 71.1. (report of the secretariat) and 71.2 Agenda item: Draft decisions on Asian big cats (Felidae spp) Proponent: India
1. Thank you Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We thank the Secretariat for the report on implementation of decisions on Asian big cats, and welcome the revised draft decisions proposed by India in document CoP18 Doc. 71.2 (Rev. 1).
3. We support retaining Decision 14.69 and agree to the deletion of Decisions 17.224, 17.225, 17.227, 17.228, 17.229, 17.230 and 17.231.
4. As stated by the US, we consider that Decision 17.226 has not been fully implemented and therefore we do not support its deletion.
5. We regret that the Secretariat has not yet undertaken missions to Parties in whose territories there are facilities of concern, and that Decision 17.227 has therefore not been fully implemented. We encourage all Parties identified as having facilities of concern to welcome a mission from the Secretariat, and urge the Secretariat to carry out these missions as soon as possible and report to the 73rd meeting of the Standing Committee.
6. We support the draft decisions in document CoP18 Doc. 71.2 (Rev. 1).
7. We also propose adoption of one additional decision. We propose this new decision to support the genetic research project TIGRIS ID, which aims to provide a reliable forensic tool for identification of processed tiger products and individual tiger profiling to be utilised by CITES enforcement agencies worldwide. More detailed information about the project and its sampling protocols can be found in CoP18 information documents 65 and 66 and reference to this project is also made in paragraph 41 of CoP18 document 71.1.
The new decision we are proposing would read as follows: (18.EE bis) Parties are encouraged to share samples of tiger specimens from living animals, seized animals or products that could contain tiger DNA with the Czech Republic national focal point for use in the genetic research project TIGRIS ID which is focusing on the development of novel techniques to facilitate tackling illegal trade in tiger specimens.
14741/19 LZ/mb 47 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
8. We support the amendments to Resolution Conf. 12.5 (Rev. CoP17) in document CoP18 Doc. 71.2 (Rev. 1) with one small amendment. In operative paragraph 1 a) we propose the deletion of the word “both” in the third line. In the amended text it does not seem to be needed. The subparagraph would read:
"all Parties and non-Parties, especially range and consumer States of Asian big cat species, to adopt comprehensive legislation or, where applicable, review existing legislation to ensure that there are provisions for deterrent penalties and that it addresses both illegal trade in and/or possession of illegally traded specimens of native and non-native Asian big cat species as well as products labelled as, or claiming to contain specimens of native and non-native Asian big cat species;"
9. We will provide/have provided our amendments in writing.
10. Thank you, Mr Chair.
------
Document No: 72 Agenda item: Seahorses (Hippocampus spp.) Proponent: Maldives, Monaco, Sri Lanka and the United States of America
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States. We would like to thank Maldives, Monaco, Sri Lanka and the United States of America for the submission of this document.
2. The EU and its Member States agree with the draft decisions proposed in this document, as amended by the Secretariat, with the aim of always improving the management and sustainability of these species, and for better dissemination of information.
------
Document No: 73 Agenda item: Great apes (Hominidae spp.) Proponent: Standing Committee
Thank you Mr/Madam Chair. I speak on behalf of the European Union and its Member States.
We had proposed amendments in the preamble and in the paragraph 1 f) but it seems that they are not included in the Com I 6 document.
14741/19 LZ/mb 48 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
We had proposed a change in the second paragraph of the preamble:
"CONCERNED that wild populations of great apes [all species of gorilla (Gorilla spp.), chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes spp.), bonobos (Pan paniscus) and orang-utan (Pongo spp.)] in Africa and Asia are threatened by the combined effects of trade in live animals, poaching for wild meat or conflicts, disease, habitat loss, fragmentation and destruction, and trade in live animals" We had also proposed a change in the paragraph 1f) regarding repatriation of seized live animals. We had proposed the following changes:
"f) support, in accordance with the Convention and where feasible, the repatriation of seized live animals to their countries or of origin if suitable facilities and experience are present in country for keeping them in conditions that guarantee the welfare of the animal; and"
------
Document No: 74 Agenda item: Rosewood timber species [Leguminosae (Fabaceae)] Proponent: Plants Committee
1. The EU and its Member States agree that Decision 17.234 should be deleted and replaced with new decisions.
2. We agree to align these decisions with proposed draft decisions of other recommendations made by the Plants and Standing Committees and therefore support the draft decisions with the editorial changes made by the Secretariat.
------
Document No: 75 Agenda item: Pangolins (Manis spp.) Proponent: Secretariat – incorporating draft decisions proposed by the Standing Committee
1. Thank you Chair.
2. The EU and its Member States welcome document 75 on Pangolins and supports the set of draft decisions as recommended by SC69, with the additional amendments suggested by the Secretariat, and supports deletion of Decisions number 17.239 and 17.240.
3. The inclusion of Pangolins in Appendix I in CoP17 resulted in a significant number of very large pangolin seizures, as already mentioned by previous speakers, without any end in sight yet. While this proves that CITES is an effective instrument, it also highlights that illegal trade in pangolin specimens continue to take place at an industrial scale and is likely having a significant impact on pangolin populations.
14741/19 LZ/mb 49 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
4. We should further scale up efforts to address this illegal trade. Range, transit and destination States should actively pursue the full implementation of Resolution Conf. 17.10, as amended by this COP. In this respect, further action may be needed as a follow-up to the information about seizures provided in paragraph 15 of document 75. In particular, the pangolin range states as well as transit and destination countries should accelerate their efforts in implementing paragraph 1 of Resolution Conf. 17.10 and report on its implementation to the Secretariat. The Secretariat should report on the implementation of this provision to the Standing Committee.
5. The exchange of information bringing significant seizures of illegal pangolin specimens to the attention of authorities in countries of origin, transit and destination, should be done without delay to enable follow-up investigations to take place.
6. This CoP could also consider adopting an additional decision encouraging the consumer States to report to the Standing Committee on implementation of paragraph 6 of Resolution Conf. 17.10, with a view to understanding the causes for consumption of pangolin parts and derivates and reducing the demand for illegal specimens.
7. The EU and its Member States believe that information on the status of Pangolin species is essential to effectively implement the Resolution Conf. 17.10. In this regard, we commend the development of new methods of monitoring the populations of pangolins, such as the ones provided in the information document submitted by the United States of America at the request of the IUCN, particularly the SSC Pangolin Specialist Group and IUCN Global Species Programme.
8. The EU and its Member States also believe that the CoP19 should receive a comprehensive reporting on the status of Pangolin species and on other relevant issues, such as trade and stockpiles, to adopt the necessary measures to ensure the protection of Pangolins.
9. After US and Gabon: Therefore, we support the document as well as the additional draft decision proposed by Gabon with the further suggestion from the US.
10. Thank you Mr/Madam Chair.
------
Document No: 76.1 Agenda item: African lion (Panthera leo) Report of the Secretariat Proponent: Secretariat, in consultation with the Chairs of the Animals and Standing Committees
1. Thank you Chair, I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States. We are grateful to the Secretariat for their report on work undertaken in relation to Decisions 17.241-245 and are pleased with the progress that has been achieved.
2. As such we agree to the deletion of Decisions 17.241-245 which are now superseded.
14741/19 LZ/mb 50 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
3. We also welcome the proposed new set of draft decisions on African lions and other big cats, including the creation of a CITES Big Cats Task Force and collaboration with CMS through the African Carnivores Initiative, as addressed in Document 96.
4. We support the adoption of these proposed Decisions but would like to suggest a few amendments, as follows.
5. Firstly, we consider that in Decision 18.BB, an additional element is required to direct the Secretariat, in consultation with the Standing Committee, to draft Terms of Reference and a modus operandi for the CITES Big Cat Task Force (with an equivalent decision directed to the Standing Committee under 18.EE) and secondly, to introduce specific time frame for activities directed to the Secretariat under Decision 18.AA and Standing Committee under 18.EE.
6. Under draft Decision 18.FF.b we also feel that the identification of lion specimens in trade through the Barcode of Wildlife project and using DNA analysis for traceability have become conflated.
7. We have prepared amendments to the Draft Decisions as I have outlined and if the Chair is agreeable we can present these verbally now?
8. Thank you Chair.
------
Document No: 76.2 Agenda item: African lion (Panthera leo) Conservation of and trade in African lions Proponent: Nigeria, Togo
1. Thank you Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We are grateful to Nigeria and Togo for the submission of this document.
3. However, we feel there is significant overlap with the series of Decisions we have just considered in Document 76.1.
4. We also concur with the views expressed by the Secretariat that the set of Decisions in Document 76.1 form a comprehensive package of measures that make the need for a separate Resolution redundant. Those measures in 76.1 include the creation of a Big Cats Task Force and actions through the African Carnivore Initiative.
5. Accordingly, Chair, we do not feel able to support this proposed Resolution but, as we have stated on Document 76.1, we warmly support the range of Decisions suggested there (with some amendments).
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 51 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Document No: 79 Agenda item: Songbird trade and conservation management (Passeriformes) Proponent: Sri Lanka and the United States of America
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We strongly support the proposal in Document 79 for the conservation implications of the songbird trade to be considered. However, rather than the Animals Committee arranging the proposed research we would suggest that a review should be commissioned by the Secretariat subject to external funding. We would therefore recommend that the draft decisions are amended to address these changes and the concerns expressed by the Secretariat.
3. It is very important that we focus on those species which are threatened by the international trade.
4. It is worth noting that the European Union has adopted a “zero tolerance approach” towards the illegal killing, taking and trade of birds in Europe and the Mediterranean Region. In this respect, Doc 79 is consistent with the current EU policies on the songbird trade.
5. We also recommend stronger cooperation between CITES and other international frameworks, such as the Bern Convention, the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS) and the East Asian-Australasian Flyway Partnership (EAAFP), which is desirable in order to address this issue.
------
Document No: 80 Agenda item: African cherry (Prunus africana) Proponent: Plants Committee
1. The EU and its Member States are the main importers of Prunus africana bark. We therefore, have a high level of responsibility to the species, and have collaborated with range states to improve knowledge on sustainable management. We congratulate the range states for their hard work and constant progress in this regard.
2. We have however noted that no sufficient funding for an international workshop could be secured. Therefore we are grateful that through the support of the CITES Tree Species Programme and the Secretariat, management of Prunus africana could also be discussed at the CITES Tree Species Programme Regional Meeting for Africa in Tanzania.
3. We believe that there is still scope for improvement in the management of the species in the wild and will continue to collaborate to enhance practices especially with regard to inventory methodology, sustainable harvesting techniques, monitoring and traceability and the role of plantation or agroforestry systems.
14741/19 LZ/mb 52 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
4. Therefore, we are looking forward to the contributions of the report of the already mentioned discussions in Tanzania with much interest.
5. The EU and its Member States agree to delete Decisions 17.250 to 17.252 and support the new draft decisions including the proposed additions by the Secretariat outlined in the document with one minor amendment.
6. This minor amendment refers to Draft Decision 18.AA a) and reads: The Plants Committee shall:
a) review the recommendations from the Prunus africana-related discussions within the ‘CITES Tree Species Programme Regional Meeting for Africa’ for consideration and advise to the range States of appropriate actions Prunus africana;
------
Document No: 81 Agenda item: African grey parrots (Psittacus erithacus) Proponent: South Africa
Thank you Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
1. Concerning draft decision 17.256 we support adding new paragraph f) on the identification of suitable habitat in range States for re-population of Psittacus erithacus where appropriate and feasible. However, we feel this should have reference to following internationally agreed guidelines (such as IUCN’s) for any such re-introductions or translocations. We suggest this revised wording:
f) the identification of suitable habitat in range States for the re-population of Psittacus erithacus where appropriate and feasible, following internationally agreed guidelines for any such re-introductions; and
2. Concerning Decision 17.258, we are in favour of its extension until CoP19, as proposed by South Africa.
3. We can agree with the proposal by the Secretariat to remove elements of the Decision 17.256 (specifically paragraphs b), c) & d)) concerning the species management-related activities, but we also note the reservations on Appendix I listing of Psittacus erithacus by DRC and some other countries.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 53 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Document No: 82 Agenda item: Banggai cardinalfish (Pterapogon kauderni) Proponent: Animals Committee
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States. We would like to thank the Animal Committee for the submission of this document.
2. EU and its Member States would also thanks and congratulates Indonesia for the efforts made and the work done on the implementations of the six decisions adopted at 17th CoP meeting.
3. EU and its Member States supports the set of draft decisions, the EU is also ready to support Indonesia in implementing Decision 18.AA.
------
Document No: 83.1 Agenda item: Rhinoceroses – Report of the Standing Committee and the Secretariat Proponent: Standing Committee and the Secretariat
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. The EU and its Member States are concerned that rhino poaching and trafficking continue at an alarmingly high level.
3. We recognize the problems related to illegal trade in rhino horn, and agree that this continues to pose a threat to the survival of rhino species in the wild.
4. We welcome the Secretariat’s report and the report by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and Traffic, which presents a detailed and informative assessment.
5. We agree with the proposals set out in this document to delete Decisions 17.135 to 17.144 and we support replacing Decisions 17.133 and 17.134 with a new draft decision 18.AA.
6. We suggest that draft decision 18. AA is amended to require Parties to report to the Secretariat by October 2021 on any activities conducted under this decision.
7. Whilst we also support draft decisions 18.BB to 18.FF, we would recommend that amendments are made to the decisions to introduce time frames for action.
8. We suggest that under 18.BB and 18.CC, the named Parties are required to report to the Secretariat by October 2021, and under 18.EE and 18. FF that the Secretariat is required to review the reports and bring any issues to the attention of the 74th Standing Committee. Under 18.EE we would recommend that the Secretariat is also required to review the reports received under Decision 18.AA.
14741/19 LZ/mb 54 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
9. We would also suggest that the 74th Standing Committee is specified in 18.DD and that the Standing Committee should be required to review any issues of concern that are brought to its attention under Decision 18.EE.
10. We propose these amendments to ensure that efforts are sustained, and that Parties remain vigilant in the implementation of measures and activities to address rhino poaching and trafficking.
Directed to all Parties
18.AA Parties should continuously review trends associated with the illegal killing of rhinoceroses and illegal trade in rhinoceros specimens, and the measures and activities they are implementing to address these crimes, to ensure that these measures and activities remain effective and are quickly adapted to respond to any newly identified trends, and to report to the Secretariat by October 2021 on any activities conducted in this regard.
Directed to China, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa and Viet Nam
18.BB China, Mozambique, Namibia, South Africa and Viet Nam are encouraged to make every effort to further strengthen their implementation of paragraphs 1 e) and 2 d) of Resolution Conf. 9.14 (Rev. CoP17) on Conservation of and trade in African and Asian rhinoceroses, including by pursuing the initiation of joint investigations and operations aimed at addressing members of organized crime networks across the entire illegal trade chain, and to report to the Secretariat, by October 2021, on any activities conducted in this regard.
Directed to Zimbabwe
18.CC Zimbabwe is encouraged to pursue the expeditious finalization of outstanding cases related to rhinoceros poaching and rhinoceros horn smuggling in court, to consider measures that could be implemented to facilitate the swift processing of such cases in future, and to report to the Secretariat, by October 2021, on any activities conducted in this regard.
Directed to the Standing Committee
18.DD The 74th Standing Committee shall review the recommendations of the Secretariat reported under Decision 18. FF and any issues of concern brought to its attention under Decision 18.EE, and prepare proposals for consideration of the 19th meeting of the Conference of the Parties.
Directed to the Secretariat
18.EE The Secretariat shall review the reports received under Decisions 18.AA, 18.BB and 18.CC, and bring any issues of concern that may arise to the attention of the 74th Standing Committee.
14741/19 LZ/mb 55 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Directed to the Secretariat
18.FF The Secretariat shall, in consultation with interested Parties and the IUCN/SSC African and Asian Rhino Specialist Groups and TRAFFIC, explore options to reflect on challenges and best practices to assist in addressing rhinoceros poaching and rhinoceros horn trafficking in the report prepared for the Conference of the Parties in accordance with paragraph 7 of Resolution Conf. 9.14 (Rev. CoP17) and prepare recommendations for consideration by the 74th Standing Committee. ------
Document No: 83.2 Agenda item: Revisions to Res. Conf. 9.14 (rev CoP17) on Conservation of and trade in African and Asian rhinoceroses, and associated decisions Proponent: Kenya
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. The EU and its Member States are concerned that rhino poaching and trafficking continue at an alarmingly high level.
3. We recognize the problems related to illegal trade in rhino horn, and agree that this continues to pose a threat to the survival of rhino species in the wild.
4. However, CITES remit is international trade and there are no provisions within it's remit to regulate domestic trade.
5. Parties are already required to report on stockpiles, and some Parties chose to report privately held stockpiles that are known to them. We consider that it would involve a disproportionate amount of work to accurately assess what horn is held in private stockpiles and we cannot support this proposal.
6. Parties are already free to destroy stockpiles if they so wish, and some of them might choose to do this publically. We do not consider that this needs to form part of Resolution 9.14.
7. The EU and its Member States therefore do not support this proposal as it stands. Concerning the US proposal, we would be happy to look into it.
------
Document No: 85 Agenda item: Queen conch (Strombus gigas) Proponent: CITES Secretariat
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States. We would like to thank the Secretariat for the submission of this document.
14741/19 LZ/mb 56 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
2. EU and its Member States support this document and agree that Decisions 17.288 and 17.290 have been fully implemented and can be deleted; and we also support the proposal to replace the remaining Decisions on queen conch (Decisions 17.285 to 17.287 and 17.289) with the set of draft decisions presented in Annex 1, noting they refer to activities which are either ongoing or remain valid for ensuring implementation of sustainable management measures across range States.
3. This species occurs in the Overseas Territories of some of the EU Member States. In addition, the EU is also a consumer and importer of Queen Conch meat. Therefore, the EU and Member States have a particular interest in the implementation of the provisions of draft decision 18. AA, 18.BB and all activities that contribute to the implementation of sustainable management of queen conch stocks in the region.
------
Document No: 87 Agenda item: Conservation of the Titicaca water frog (Telmatobius culeus) Proponent: Peru
1. Thank you Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. Telmatobius culeus was listed in Appendix I at CoP17 and as it seems that international trade is not the main driver of the currently reported population declines, further measures that are relevant for the conservation of this species can be best addressed through direct, bilateral cooperation between the two range states Bolivia and Peru.
3. Accordingly, we consider the adoption of a dedicated resolution on the conservation of Titicaca water frog to be premature. We see more benefit in developing national and international cooperation to support the conservation of the species through direct, bilateral cooperation between the two ranges states, Bolivia and Peru.
------
Document No: 89 Agenda item: Totoaba (Totoaba macdonaldi) Proponent: CITES Secretariat
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States. We would like to thank the CITES Secretariat for the submission of this document. We would also like to thank Mexico, the US and China for the efforts they have put into conserving this species.
2. The totoaba has long been subject to illegal fishing and illegal trade which has not only negatively impacted this species but has also led to the significant decline of the vaquita. It is crucial to the conservation of both these species that Parties continue to eliminate supply and demand of illegally sourced specimens and support the recovery of totoaba and vaquita in the wild.
14741/19 LZ/mb 57 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
3. The EU and its Member States therefore support the draft decisions in this document, especially the amended draft decisions on totoaba in Annex 1 to the present document which take into consideration the findings of the high-level mission to Mexico, and the outcomes of the 43rd session of the World Heritage Committee. Furthermore, we support most of the new amendments proposed by the US, expect for the deletion of the term “illegally sourced” in 18.AA c) and in 18.CC a) and the deletion of references to the proposed study in 18.AA f) and 18CC c). We also suggest inserting in 18.BB b) the term “where appropriate” before it states “the recommendations contained in the 2019 report etc. The Decisions as amended are now more robust, time-bound and reflect the importance and the urgency we all attach to the conservation of both totoaba and the vaquita.
4. We look forward to seeing these positive actions put into place.
------
Document No: 91 Agenda item: Conservation of Vicugna vicugna and trade in its fibres and products Proponent: Argentina
1. Thank you, Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We thank Argentina for presenting this document and all the signatories of the Agreement on the Conservation of Vicuña for deciding to present it to CoP18.
3. We support the proposed draft resolution on conservation of vicuña and trade in its fibre and products, with the editorial amendments proposed by the Secretariat.
------
Document No: 94 Agenda item: Conservation management of and trade in marine ornamental fishes Proponent: European Union, Switzerland and the United States of America
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States. We are glad to present you document 94 for the Conservation management of and Trade in marine ornamental fishes, with Switzerland and the United States of America.
2. The majority of the trade in marine ornamental species concerns species that are not listed on the CITES Appendices. The international trade in those species has continued to increase and there is an obvious need to assess the conservation impacts of the international trade in live marine ornamental fish.
3. CITES is the right tool for those studies, even for non-listed species, as one of the major threats is international trade. The proposed proactive approach will help to anticipate situations on a case-by-case basis before any might become critical.
14741/19 LZ/mb 58 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
4. However, we have noted the comments of the Secretariat and we agree with their recommendation to ensure the workshop we propose in the draft Decisions includes representatives of key stakeholders from the fisheries and from industry. We are also content with their other suggested amendments.
5. With those amendments, we recommend the endorsement of these draft Decisions.
------
Document No: 95 Agenda item: Guidance materials, activities and tools aimed at enhancing Parties’ capacity to regulate bushmeat trade Proponent: Secretariat
1. Thank you Mr Chair.
2. On behalf of the European Union and its Member States we largely welcome and support the proposed amendments of Resolution Conf. 13.11. We particularly welcome the inclusion of outcomes from the 14th Conference of the Parties to the CBD. This includes voluntary guidance for a sustainable wild meat sector in the tropics and sub-tropics, and the harmonisation of the term ‘wild meat’ instead of ‘bushmeat’ in line with the CBD, CMS, IUCN and others.
3. However, we suggest the following: Firstly, we should be consistent in our use of terms throughout CITES and so the term ‘bushmeat’ should be replaced with ‘wild meat’ in document 73;
4. Secondly, the definition of ‘wild meat’ used by the CBD in Decision 14/7 relates only to the tropics and sub-tropics. As para 17 of this document notes, wild meat is harvested in many parts of the world and not just in the tropics and sub-tropics. Accordingly, we suggest retaining the current definition of ‘bushmeat’ in the CITES glossary (namely: ‘The meat for human consumption derived from wild animals’) but changing, of course, ‘bushmeat’ to ‘wild meat’;
5. Thirdly, the new suggested paragraph 2.c in res. Conf. 13.11 refers to the voluntary guidance in CBD Decision 14/7 – for clarification, the words ‘in the tropics and sub-tropics’, should be inserted after the term ‘sustainable wild meat sector’.
6. We also agree with the recommendation to delete Decisions 14.73 (Rev. CoP17), 14.74 (Rev. CoP17), 17.112 and 17.113 which are now superseded.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 59 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Document No: 96 Agenda item: African Carnivores Initiative Proponent: Secretariat
1. Thank you, Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We support the proposed decisions regarding the African Carnivores Initiative, paralleling and complementing the Resolutions and decisions adopted by the CMS and CITES relating to four African carnivore species: African lion, leopard, cheetah and African Wild dog, and reflecting on the outcome of the First Meeting of Range States for the Joint CITES-CMS African Carnivores Initiative.
3. However, Decisions 18.DD-EE-FF include actions that are not time bound and are largely encouragement to Parties and others to support the African Carnivores Initiative and related Decisions. Therefore, they seem to be more appropriate for a Resolution and might be better inserted in Res. Conf. 13.3 on cooperation and synergy with the CMS.
4. We welcome the first ACI meeting which was held in November in Germany and take note of its outcome. We want to express once again our interest in further developing this joint initiative. We believe that the cooperation and streamlining of technical, administrative and financial resources and activities between CITES and CMS will maximize the effective and immediate conservation of African carnivores in which these two Conventions have a shared interest.
5. ACI will also help to align the data assessment in joint databases, to undertake shared studies of population trends, to monitor stocks and the implementation of measures under both, CMS and CITES.
6. In that respect, we also welcome the expected appointment of a Junior Professional Officer (JPO) to the CMS Secretariat to support the implementation of CMS and CITES Decisions on the Joint CMS-CITES African Carnivores Initiative. We thank Germany for having generously offered to fund this post.
------
Document No: 97 Agenda item: West African vulture trade and conservation management Proponent: Burkina Faso, Niger and Senegal
1. Thank you Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We are supportive of the intentions of this document. We support the draft decisions with the amendments proposed by the Secretariat in order to ensure that the decisions are CITES- relevant, efficient and proportionate in relation to the concerns.
14741/19 LZ/mb 60 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
3. In addition, if the Animals Committee is being asked to review information, it may be more productive, subject to the availability of resources, for the Secretariat to be asked to commission a review for the Animals Committee to consider, rather than to rely solely on responses to a Notification.
4. The EU Birds Directive protects four of the concerned West African Vulture species in EU. Hence, the species are subject to EU’s own conservation actions. The Egyptian Vulture is a migratory breeding species, and three other species are vagrant species in EU.
5. We support CMS and CITES joining forces to address the decline of West African vultures. In this regard, addressing illegal poisoning and belief-based trade is very important. There are strong links between elephant and rhino poaching and vulture poisoning events.
6. Thank you.
------
Document No: 98 Agenda item: Reservations with respect to the amendment to Appendices I and II Proponent: Secretariat
1. We, the EU and its Member States, welcome and support the proposal of the Secretariat to amend Res. Conf. 4.25 (Rev. CoP 14) on Reservations as contained in Annex 1 to Doc. 98 on reservations with respects to Amendments of Appendices I and II.
2. We fully agree with the Secretariat’s analysis that the acceptance of late reservations after the 90-day deadline will undermine the integrity of the Convention and its functioning by generating legal uncertainty among Parties and the regulated community as to the regime governing trade in specimens of species covered by a late reservation. The suggested amendments will give clear guidance to the Depositary Government with regard to the admission of reservations and their withdrawal.
------
Document No: 99 Agenda item: Standard nomenclature Proponent: Plants and Animals Committees in collaboration with the CITES Secretariat
1. The EU and its Member States would like to thank the Nomenclature Specialists for Fauna and Flora and all the experts throughout all CITES Parties for their work during the last period on these very important issues that help to build the foundation of a science based convention.
2. With some exceptions we support the proposed amendments to Annex to Res. Conf. 12.11 regarding change of taxonomic references, the associated draft Decisions and the proposed work plan for Plants.
14741/19 LZ/mb 61 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
3. Regarding the consultant’s report in Annex 5 on the potential adoption of a new standard nomenclature reference for birds and Decision 17.312: The complexity of taxonomic changes for birds and the work required to review these, suggest that further discussion is needed. We therefore support extending the Decision to require the Animals Committee to consider the review and make recommendations to CoP19.
4. Regarding the draft Decisions concerning the Dalbergia and Diospyros checklist, we support the draft decisions as amended by the Secretariat and nomenclature expert.
5. Regarding Atztekium valdezii, we agree with the Secretariat that the species most likely fulfils the listing criteria for Appendix I. Declaring it a synonym to a widely propagated plant is causing enforcement issues in countries outside of the natural range of the species and the prosecution of illegal imports. However, we do acknowledge that the only range state Mexico supports the recommendation of the Secretariat. Taking into the account Mexico's position,we decided not to oppose the proposal.
------
Document No: 100 Agenda item: Inclusion of species in Appendix III Proponent: Secretariat/SC
1. The EU and its Member States support the proposed draft decisions and the proposed changes to Resolution Conf. 9.25 (Rev. CoP17).
2. We would like to thank the joint intersessional working group of the Animals and the Plants Committees, the working group of the Standing Committee and all participants of these working groups for their work which establishes the basis for a more effective and consistent implementation of Appendix III by all Parties.
3. We encourage range states to use CITES Appendix III.
4. Appendix III has value as a first and immediate measure to prevent illegal activities. It prevents at an early stage that international trade undermines domestic conservation measures and may provide species-related information relevant to their consideration for inclusion of species in Appendix I or II.
5. The Appendix III-listing can be easily achieved through a simple unilateral listing. Range states may thus decide to list a species, controlling trade in nationally protected wildlife and thereby improving international cooperation to control trade.
6. If species are listed by range states in Appendix III, also destination countries will be informed about foreign law; this information enables them to disallow imports of Appendix- III specimens in the absence of a CITES export permit or a certificate of origin. With that, also the demand of species illegally acquired in range states, for example as part of pet trade, can be reduced.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 62 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Document No: 101 Agenda item: Annotations Proponent: Standing Committee
1. The EU and its Member States thank the Standing Committee Working Group on annotations for its productive discussions and progress on a number of key issues since CoP17.
2. We support the proposed amendment to Resolution Conf. 11.21 (Rev. CoP17) and the proposed revision of Paragraph 7 of the Interpretation Section of the CITES Appendices.
3. We also support the changes by Canada regarding the Decisions.
4. The EU and its Member States regret nonetheless that the draft amendments to Decision 16.162 (Rev. CoP17) – as presented in the form of new draft Decisions by the Secretariat – would potentially result in abandoning the idea of a more fundamental review of existing timber annotations. In light of on-going discussions on the review of some timber annotations such as annotation #15, we would suggest that the Standing Committee mandate should be more explicit on the need for some more systematic streamlining of timber annotations in view of CoP19. While acknowledging that the timber trade study initially requested under Decision 15.35 could not be completed, we would propose to request the Standing Committee to carry out a review of timber annotations, in light of the experience gained by Parties since CoP17.
5. We propose therefore that the CoP should request the Standing Committee to look into the matter, as well as request the Plants Committee to provide its contribution and guidance to the Standing Committee. We would be happy to share our suggestions in writing should you wish to request the Secretariat to prepare a com doc.
6. We would also suggest that draft Decision 18.BB may need to be amended in order to give a mandate to the SC to review and refine some of the other terms of the new “annotation #15” if adopted by CoP18, such as the terms “item”, “finished musical instrument part” and “finished musical instrument accessory”.
18.AA Directed to Parties and relevant stakeholders
Parties and relevant stakeholders are invited to provide to the Secretariat information regarding the mechanisms proposed in paragraph a) of Decision 18.CC, the definitions proposed in Decision 18.BB and the implementation challenges resulting from the implementation of the annotations to the Appendices, including but not limited to those on the rosewood-tree species, agarwood-producing taxa (Aquilaria spp. and Gyrinops spp.), Aniba rosaeodora, Bulnesia sarmientoi and orchids, and provide examples of practical solutions identified when handling those challenges.
14741/19 LZ/mb 63 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
18.BB Directed to the Standing Committee
The Standing Committee shall, in collaboration with the Animals and Plants Committees, develop or refine definitions of terms used in current annotations as appropriate, including but not limited to the terms “musical instruments” and “transformed wood”, and submit them for adoption by the Conference of the Parties and subsequent inclusion in the Interpretation section of the Appendices.
18.CC Decision directed to the Standing Committee
The Standing Committee shall, in collaboration with the Animals and Plants Committees, determine requirements for development and adoption by the Conference of the Parties of: a) a mechanism for undertaking a periodic review of existing annotations; and b) a mechanism for the a priori review of annotations proposed for consideration at meetings of the Conference of the Parties to support consistent implementation of the guidance on annotations provided in Resolution Conf. 11.21 (Rev. CoP17) on Use of annotations in Appendix I and II.
18.DD Directed to the Standing Committee
The Standing Committee shall consider the feasibility of, and the requirements for, developing an information system for the purpose of processing trade data associated with transactions in specimens of CITES-listed tree species authorized under the provisions of the Convention.
18.XX Directed to the Plants Committee
The Plants Committee shall, based on scientific information available, review existing annotations for tree species and make its recommendations to streamline these annotations to the Standing Committee, taking account of the guidance provided by Resolution Conf. 11.21 (Rev. CoP17);
18.YY Directed to the Standing Committee
The Standing Committee shall, based on the contribution by the Plants Committee as requested under Decision 18.XX, and based on the information provided by Parties under Decision 18.AA, review existing annotations for tree species and identify options to streamline these annotations, taking account of the guidance provided by Resolution Conf. 11.21 (Rev. CoP17);
14741/19 LZ/mb 64 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
18.EE Directed to the Standing Committee
The Standing Committee shall assess the report submitted by the Secretariat required under Decision 18.FF and, if appropriate, make recommendations on the definitions, mechanisms and, information systems and streamlining of tree annotations mentioned in Decisions 18.BB and, 18.CC and 18.YY and other relevant matters for submission to the 19th meeting of the Conference of the Parties.
18.FF Directed to the Secretariat
The Secretariat shall issue a Notification to the Parties requesting input pursuant to Decision 18.AA and provide a summary of the responses received from Parties and concerned stakeholders and provide recommendations regarding the mechanisms and the information system proposed in Decision 18.CC and 18.DD, the definitions to be developed under Decision 18.BB and the challenges resulting from the implementation of the annotations to the Appendices, as well as the streamlining of tree annotations proposed in Decision 18.YY, to the Standing Committee.
------
Document No: 103 Agenda item: Guidance for the publication of the Appendices Proponent: Canada
Thank you, Chair. The EU and its Member States support the draft decisions and support the proposed amendments by the Secretariat.
------
Proposal No: 2 Agenda item: Saiga tatarica – Transfer from Appendix II to Appendix I Proponents: Mongolia and United States of America
1. We support the interpretation by the US explaining that the proposal covers both Saiga species, including the populations of Kazakhstan and Russia (Saiga tatarica and S. borealis / Saiga spp.); We recognise the urgent need for action on saiga. While some Saiga populations, for example in Kazakhstan, are recovering after the last mass-mortality in 2015, the species in Mongolia remains at very low levels that makes the population very vulnerable. All Saiga populations remain highly susceptible to sudden mass-die offs from several diseases. Therefore, despite the positive actions that have been undertaken so far, substantial and urgent efforts are still needed to conserve the Saiga. We note the susceptibility of the species to sudden mass die-offs but also the potential of the species for subsequent fast population recovery. As such, and given recent population increases, we doubt that the populations of Russia and Kazakhstan meet the Appendix I biological criteria.
14741/19 LZ/mb 65 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
2. We have listened carefully to the comments made by some of the other range states and other parties.
3. We understand the concerns that uplisting of Saiga of Russia and Kazakhstan might influence efforts to develop sustainable management under the CMS Saiga Memorandum of understanding.
4. We therefore encourage the three main range states (Mongolia, Kazakhstan and Russia) to come to an agreement on the best way forward.
5. Consequently, we are unable to support this listing proposal in its current form but would be willing to consider a revised version, if the proponents decide to limit the scope of the uplisting to the population of Mongolia, which we believe meets the criteria for listing in appendix I. Alternatively, if discussions with other range States provide other ways of moving forward, we are happy to consider these also.
------
Proposal No: 8 Agenda item: Ceratotherium simum simum – Remove the existing annotation for the population of Eswatini Proponent: Eswatini
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We recognize and encourage the significant efforts of Eswatini in combatting poaching of rhino and illegal trade in rhino horn, species management and other conservation efforts.
3. The EU and its Member States are committed to continue to stand by Eswatini and its other African partners as they continue to increase their efforts in wildlife conservation and tackle wildlife trafficking.
4. However, rhino poaching and trafficking continue at an alarmingly high level. Given these continuing high levels, it is, in the opinion of the EU and its Member States, premature to decide upon a resumption of trade in rhino horn. The precautionary safeguards are not met and the resumption of trade in rhino horn would undermine demand reduction actions by many Parties for this species.
5. The EU and its Member States thus oppose Eswatini’s proposal to remove the existing annotation for its southern rhino population and any other change to the current CITES regime which could result in a re-authorisation of international trade in rhino horn.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 66 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Proposal No: 9 Agenda item: Ceratotherium simum simum – Transfer of the population of Ceratotherium simum simum of Namibia from Appendix I to Appendix II with the following annotation: “For the exclusive purpose of allowing international trade in: a. live animals to appropriate and acceptable destinations; and b. hunting trophies. All other specimens shall be deemed to be specimens of species included in Appendix I and the trade in them shall be regulated accordingly.” Proponent: Namibia
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We recognize and encourage the significant efforts of Namibia in combatting poaching of rhino and illegal trade in rhino horn, species management and other conservation efforts. The EU and its Member States will continue to stand by Namibia and its other African partners as they increase their efforts in wildlife conservation and in tackling wildlife trafficking.
3. Nevertheless, the EU and its Member States remain concerned by the high levels of poaching and trafficking for this species.
4. The EU and its Member States recognize the increased income potential from a downlisting, but downlisting might also be perceived as a signal that the fight against poaching and trafficking is over, which is clearly not the case. As this is one of the priorities for the EU and its Member States, we are not in a position to support the proposal at this point in time.
------
Proposal No: 10 Agenda item: Loxodonta Africana – Transfer the population of Zambia from Appendix I to Appendix II subject to: 1. Trade in registered raw ivory (tusks and pieces) for commercial purposes only to CITES approved trading partners who will not re-export. 2. Trade in hunting trophies for noncommercial purposes; 3. Trade in hides and leather goods. 4. All other specimens shall be deemed to be specimens of species in Appendix I and the trade in them shall be regulated accordingly. Proponent: Zambia
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its EU and its Member States.
2. We recognize and encourage the significant efforts of Zambia in combatting the poaching of elephants and the illegal ivory trade, species management and other conservation efforts. This proposal would allow international trade in ivory, which would counter all current attempts to curb the demand. This would lead to a new spike in poaching and illegal trade in ivory.
3. We have noted the addendum to LP 10 however we are not convinced that the precautionary measures are met and so we oppose the proposal.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 67 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Proposal No: 11 Agenda item: Loxodonta Africana – Amend annotation 2 as follows: “For the exclusive purpose of allowing: a. trade in hunting trophies for non-commercial purposes b. trade in live animals to appropriate and acceptable destinations, as defined in Resolution Conf. 11.20 (Rev. CoP17), for Botswana and Zimbabwe and for in situ conservation programmes for Namibia and South Africa; c. trade in hides; d. trade in hair; e. trade in leather goods for commercial or non-commercial purposes for Botswana, Namibia and South Africa and for non-commercial purposes for Zimbabwe; f. trade in individually marked and certified ekipas incorporated in finished jewellery for non- commercial purposes for Namibia and ivory carvings for non-commercial purposes for Zimbabwe; g. trade in registered raw ivory (for Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe, whole tusks and pieces) subject to the following: i. only registered government owned stocks, originating in the State excluding seized ivory and ivory of unknown origin); ii. only to trading partners that have been verified by the Secretariat, in consultation with the Standing Committee, to have sufficient national legislation and domestic trade controls to ensure that the imported ivory will not be re-exported and will be managed in accordance with all requirements of Resolution Conf. 10.10 (Rev. CoP17) concerning domestic manufacturing and trade; iii. not before the Secretariat has verified the prospective importing countries and the registered government-owned stocks; iv. raw ivory pursuant to the conditional sale of registered government-owned ivory stocks agreed at CoP12, which are 20,000 kg (Botswana), 10,000 kg (Namibia) and 30,000 kg (South Africa); v. in addition to the quantities agreed at CoP12, government-owned ivory from Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe registered by 31 January 2007 and verified by the Secretariat may be traded and des-patched, with the ivory in paragraph (g) iv) above, in a single sale per destination under strict supervision of the Secretariat; vi. the proceeds of the trade are used exclusively for elephant conservation and community conservation and development programmes within or adjacent to the elephant range; and vii. the additional quantities specified in paragraph g) v) above shall be traded only after the Standing Commit-tee has agreed that the above conditions have been met; and no further proposals to allow trade in elephant ivory from populations already in Appendix II shall be submit-ted to the Conference of the Parties for the period from CoP14 and ending nine years from the date of the single sale of ivory that is to take place in accordance with provisions in para-graphs g) i), g) ii), g) iii), g) vi) and g) vii). In addition such further proposals shall be dealt with in accordance with Decisions 16.55 and 14.78 (Rev. CoP16). On a proposal from the Secretariat, the Standing Committee can decide to cause this trade to cease partially or completely in the event of non-compliance by exporting or importing countries, or in the case of proven detrimental impacts of the trade on other elephant populations. All other specimens shall be deemed to be specimens of species included in Appendix I and the trade in them shall be regulated accordingly.” Proponent: Namibia, Botswana, Zimbabwe
14741/19 LZ/mb 68 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We recognize and encourage the significant efforts of the proponents in combatting the poaching of elephants and the illegal ivory trade, species management and other conservation efforts.
3. The EU and its Member States oppose any change to the current CITES regime which could result in relaxing the current ban on international trade in elephant ivory or could result in resumption of international trade in elephant ivory.
4. The current proposal would result in relaxing the current ban and the resumption of international trade in ivory, and we fear this would lead to a new spike in poaching and illegal trade in ivory and would undermine current demand reduction action.
5. Therefore, the EU and its Member States are not in a position to support this proposal.
------
Proposal No: 13 Agenda item: Mammuthus primigenius – Include in App. II Proponent: Israel
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We recognize the importance of protecting the African elephant, and applaud all actions taken to protect this species.
3. Nonetheless, actions need to be in line with CITES practices and provide clear conservation benefits. The purpose of CITES is to protect species from over-exploitation and prevent them from becoming extinct. The proposal at hand is seeking to list an already extinct species, which goes against the founding logic of the convention.
4. The proponents argue that the lookalike aspect is the founding basis for the listing. However, we are not convinced that the similarities between mammoth and elephant ivory provide a sufficient basis for listing. We understand that the two types of ivory display unique characteristics that can be readily distinguished, even by non-experts. There is also no substantial evidence that mammoth ivory is used to launder elephant ivory.
5. The EU and its EU and its Member States thus oppose this proposal.
------
Proposal No: 18 Agenda item: Syrmaticus reevesii – Include in Appendix II Proponent: People’s Republic of China
1. Thank you Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
14741/19 LZ/mb 69 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
2. We are grateful to China for this proposal. 3. Although exports of the species for commercial purposes have been prohibited under Chinese law, we faced some imports of relatively large quantities of feathers originating in China for commercial purposes to the different EU Member States.
4. The species clearly meets the criteria for inclusion in Appendix II.
5. However, the species has been introduced to several European countries, such as UK, FR, CZ and SK for sport hunting, and some populations have semi-naturalized and supported by annual releases. Moreover, the species is amongst the most common pheasant species in captivity and breeds relatively easily.
6. Therefore, the EU and its Member States ask China the reduce the scope of the proposal to Chinese population only. In that case, we maximise the conservation benefit for natural population and the administrative burden linked to management of trade in specimens from other sources remains proportionate.
7. In that case we strongly support this proposal.
------
Proposal No: 19 Agenda item: Balearica pavonina – Transfer from Appendix II to Appendix I Proponent: Burkina Faso, Côte d’Ivoire and Senegal
1. Thank you Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We are grateful to Burkina Faso, Côte d’Ivoire and Senegal for this proposal and their hard work in the conservation of West African wildlife.
3. Although the species is legally protected in most range States, live trapping for local domestication and international trade has reportedly been the cause of severe declines in certain populations.
4. Implementation of the Appendix II listing has been raised through the RST process, with four States subject to recommendations to suspend trade. However, the success is limited, because the illegal international trade is reported to be a concern.
5. Since the species is affected by international trade and the estimated population decline may be close to and could exceed 50% over the last three generations, the Black Crowned-crane meets the criteria for inclusion in Appendix I.
6. Therefore, the EU and its Member States support this proposal.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 70 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Proposal No: 22 Agenda item: Crocodylus acutus – Transfer the population of Mexico from Appendix I to Appendix II Proponent: Mexico
1. Thank you Mr/Madam Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. Mexico has already set a good example of sustainable management with its programme for Crocodylus moreletii, and we fully trust that it can successfully apply a similar model to specific populations of C. acutus, which no longer meet the criteria for inclusion in Appendix I.
3. We take note of the overall positive assessment made by IUCN-TRAFFIC, the assessment of the CITES Secretariat, and the statement of the IUCN / Species Survival Commission (SSC) Crocodile Specialist Group on this proposal.
------
Proposal No: 23-26 Agenda item: Calotes nigrilabris and Calotes pethiyagodai, Ceratophora spp., Cophotis ceylanica and Cophotis dumbara, Lyriocephalus scutatus – Include in Appendix I Proponent: Sri Lanka
1. Thank you Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We support the approach by Sri Lanka on doc 23, 24 and 25. However, we are of the view that where zero quota is introduced, it should apply to commercial trade only.
3. Lyriocephalus scutatus is not considered to be threatened by the IUCN, the species has a range of several thousand square kilometres, inhabits a broad range of habitats, and can adapt to moderately modified ecosystems. Therefore the biological criteria for an inclusion in Appendix I do not seem to be met.
4. However, it can be expected that this species is and will remain in considerable international demand, which can have a negative impact on the population.
5. For these reasons, the EU is ready to support listing of the species in Appendix II with a zero quota for commercial trade in case Sri Lanka amends the proposal accordingly.
------
Proposal No: 27 Agenda item: Goniurosaurus spp. – Include species of China and Viet Nam in Appendix II Proponent: European Union, People’s Republic of China, Socialist Republic of Viet Nam
1. Thank you Mr/ Madam Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
14741/19 LZ/mb 71 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
2. The EU highly appreciates the fruitful and close cooperation with China and Viet Nam in drafting the proposal.
3. Tiger geckos are traded in the EU in high numbers in relation to their small distribution ranges and low densities. International trade in wild specimens is considered to have already caused local extinction in several species. Hence, the EU bears responsibility for the conservation of tiger geckos.
4. Several species already meet the criteria for Appendix I. However, as species within each clade morphologically resemble each other and can hardly be distinguished by non-specialist, we propose to list all species in Appendix II in order to reduce challenges related to a split listing. Also, it is likely, that further species may be discovered in China and Viet Nam in the close future. As such, we want to ensure, that such new species will be eventually listed in CITES Appendix II as well.
5. We therefore invite Parties to support the proposal to list all species of Goniurosaurus from China and Viet Nam in Appendix II.
------
Proposal No: 28 Agenda item: Gekko gecko – Include in Appendix II Proponent: European Union, India, Philippines and United States of America
1. Thank you Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. Tokay geckos occur over a large range and are considered as common because they often dwell in houses and are consequently frequently encountered by humans.
3. However, their population density in natural biotopes is much lower and their absence often remains unnoticed.
4. Still, reports about declines and local extinctions probably caused by over-collection exist from Bangladesh, Indonesia, Thailand, China, and Myanmar and the Philippines.
5. All available information indicates alledged breeding operations do not provide a relevant output and virtually all trade in tokay geckos is thought to be in animals that were harvested from the wild.
6. As their territorial calls make Tokay geckos easily locatable harvesting also affects natural populations and there this species fulfills an important ecological role as it can influence the presence of smaller predatory species.
7. Although, trade peaked around 2015 when millions of specimens have been traded in a single year, the species remains widely used in traditional medicine and high numbers are sold throughout southeast Asia in dried form or preserved in alcohol and to a lesser extent also kept as a pet.
14741/19 LZ/mb 72 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
8. We do not doubt that considerable trade in Tokay geckos can be sustainable but consider a basic conservation management necessary to prevent local overexploitation and consequential negative impacts on natural ecosystems.
9. Therefore, including the species in Appendix II of CITES is not only justified according to the listing criteria, it would also have a tangible conservation effect.
------
Proposal No: 29 Agenda item: Gonatodes daudini – Include in Appendix I Proponent: Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
1. Thank you Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. The exceptionally high demand for Gonatodes daudini stimulates illegal harvesting which is unsuitable and leads to the destruction of essential habitat structures.
3. The proposal of Saint Vincent and the Grenadines highlights not only the undoubtably existing need to combat this unsustainable trade but also commits to improved protection of the habitats against collateral damage caused by harvesting and human encroachment.
4. Only this combination of measures has the potential to save this small gecko species from extinction.
5. Accordingly, we support the inclusion of Gonatodes daudini in Appendix I as it has been proposed by Saint Vincent and the Grenadines.
------
Proposal No: 30 Agenda item: Paroedura androyensis – Include in Appendix II Proponent: European Union and Madagascar
1. Thank you Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. The occurrence of Paroedura androyensis is confined to the dry forests of southern Madagascar which are heavily affected by deforestation and subsequent degradation.
3. In the last years, trade has exceeded thousand wild caught specimens annually and it seems likely that increased harvesting is a by-product of logging the large trees which are an essential day time retreat for this species.
4. Inclusion of Paroedura androyensis in Appendix II is a necessary measure to aid Madagascar in restricting trade to sustainable levels and will hopefully also highlight the necessity to protect its unique habitat.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 73 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Proposal No: 36 Agenda item: Geochelone elegans – Transfer from Appendix II to Appendix I Proponent: Bangladesh, India, Senegal, and Sri Lanka
1. Thank you Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We acknowledge that the large distribution range of Geochelone elegans and its ability to adapt to modified habitats means it is not a clear candidate for inclusion in Appendix I.
3. However, it is the most frequently seized tortoise in illegal trade with an estimated 6000 specimens confiscated annually, and several tens of thousands of Indian star tortoises are harvested each year and entered illegal trade, without controls which would ensure sustainability.
4. It is our view, that the high volumes of illegal trade being reported support the proponent’s conclusion that trade is likely to be causing a steady population-decline and local extinctions.
5. The high number of confiscations demonstrate a considerable enforcement effort by range, transit, and consumer countries, but nonetheless appear to be insufficient to discourage illegal harvesting.
6. Consequently, the EU supports transferring the species to Appendix I as it has been proposed by Bangladesh, India, Senegal, and Sri Lanka.
------
Proposal No: 37 Agenda item: Malacochersus tornieri – Transfer from Appendix II to Appendix I Proponent: Kenya and United States of America
1. Thank you Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We welcome the proposal by Kenya and the United States of America to list Malacochersus tornieri in Appendix I of CITES.
3. Its dorsally flattened carapace makes Malacochersus tornieri unique among all tortoises and has created a high market demand which can not be fully met by captive breeding.
4. In addition, this species is exceptionally vulnerable as it has a very low reproductive rate and restricted and scattered habitats.
5. In response to concerns over unsustainable harvest levels, the EU has treated Malacochersus tornieri equivalent to an inclusion in Appendix I [by listing it in Annex A of the EU Wildlife Trade regulation] more than two decades ago.
14741/19 LZ/mb 74 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
6. Consequently, we support the proposal to list Malacochersus tornieri in Appendix I of CITES.
------
Proposal No: 38 Agenda item: Hyalinobatrachium spp., Centrolene spp., Cochranella spp. and Sachatamia spp. – Include in Appendix II Proponent: Costa Rica and El Salvador
1. Thank you Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We welcome the efforts of range states to protect their native fauna but also assume the responsibility to consider to what extrent the inclusion of species in the Appendices of CITES serves this purpose.
3. In glass frogs, reported trade occurs mostly in species which are classified as Least Concern and the inclusion of more than 60 species according to the look-alike criterion does not seem to be proportional.
4. Consequently, we oppose this proposal in its current form but would be willing to consider a revised version which is restricted to species which can be demonstrated to fulfil the listing criteria.
5. As developing such amended text requires time, we would like to encourage the proponents to consider withdrawing the proposal and developing a more focused proposal for CoP 19. We believe that the set of draft decisions on amphibians as presented to the CoP as working document 62 and amended in the working group may provide a good framework to consider also this group of species and to provide guidance for any future listing.
------
Proposal No: 39 Agenda item: Echinotriton chinhaiensis and Echinotriton maxiquadratus – Include in Appendix II Proponent: People’s Republic of China
1. Thank you Mr/ Madam Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. The EU thanks China for proposing to include the spiny newt species Echinotriton chinhaiensis and Echinotriton maxiquadratus, endemic to China, in Appendix II of the convention. We appreciate the monitoring and awareness raising activities particularly for Echinotriton chinhaiensis in China.
3. The EU is aware that both species are highly threatened by fragmention and loss of habitats. They survived only in extremely small populations, suggesting that any trade in wild specimens is detrimental.
14741/19 LZ/mb 75 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
4. The genus Echinotriton resembles members of the genus Tylototriton in their morphology and ecology, from which it was split as distinct genus only in 1982 and for which the EU together with China presented a separate proposal for inclusion in Appendix II. On the basis of the look-alike criterium we highly recommend the adoption of both proposals in tandem.
5. In conclusion, the EU supports the inclusion of Echinotriton chinhaiensis and Echinotriton maxiquadratus in Appendix II of the convention.
------
Proposal No: 40 + 41 Agenda item: Paramesotriton spp. and Tylototriton spp. and. – Include in Appendix II
1. Thank you Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States. The proposal to include all species of the genera Tylototriton and Paramesotriton in Appendix II of the convention was drafted jointly by the EU, China, and Viet Nam, whose close cooperation we highly appreciate.
2. Considerable international trade in these newts is well documented with imports into the EU and US for the pet being high in relation to the species’ small distribution ranges. Together with further trade among Asian countries it has contributed strongly to population declines.
3. Most species of these newts are considered to be in decline due to both habitat loss and unsustainable harvesting. Some likely meet the biological criteria for Appendix I already now. However, species identification based morphology is challenging even for specialists, and is likely, that many specimens are traded under false species names. Hence, we propose to list all species in both genera in Appendix II in order to reduce implementation challenges related to a split-listing.
4. We therefore invite all Parties to support the proposals.
------
Proposal No: 42 Agenda item: Isurus oxyrinchus and Isurus paucus (Mako sharks) – Include in Appendix II Proponent: Bangladesh, Benin, Bhutan, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Cabo Verde, Chad, Côte d'Ivoire, Dominican Republic, Egypt, European Union, Gabon, Gambia, Jordan, Lebanon, Liberia, Maldives, Mali, Mexico, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Palau, Samoa, Senegal, Sri Lanka, Sudan and Togo
1. Thank you Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. We thank Mexico for developing this proposal, which we have co-sponsored together with many other Parties. The large number of early support shows that CITES is increasingly recognised as important instrument for the protection also of commercially exploited marine species, where they meet the listing criteria.
14741/19 LZ/mb 76 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
3. [As other Parties have pointed out] We are all aware that Makos are extremely vulnerable and spend the majority of their time on the high seas, where they’re largely unmonitored, unregulated and are subject to overfishing. The status of the population is difficult to accurately assess due to a lack of biological information and inaccurate and incomplete reporting of catches. In particular, catch statistics (landing and discards) were considered [need to say by whom, if we quote] to “grossly underestimate” shark mortality due to the trade for shark fins. Fishing is the main threat facing these sharks, especially as a bycatch in pelagic fisheries worldwide.
4. Viewed globally, the threat status of I. oxyrinchus is geographically variable, as evidenced by the status of the different subpopulations that have been assessed by FAO and IUCN. However, the situation for the Mako sharks in Mediterranean Sea especially remains very critical. The IUCN Red list assessment concluded it was critically endangered (CR) in this region in 2016. A very recent studies (July 2019) informed us about the increase of the concerns in North Atlantic Ocean because of significant spatial overlap (more than 60%) in the space use of shortfin mako sharks I. oxyrinchus and longline fisheries.
5. Due to the high value of its meat and fins, it is not clear whether any national-level attempts to reduce overfishing would be able to reduce the mortality of the species. Far stronger management action is needed for this species; inclusion on CITES Appendix II can assist in implementing, monitoring and enforcing such action.
6. The IUCN/TRAFFIC review of the listing proposal highlighted that regulation of trade is required to ensure that harvest from the wild is not reducing populations to levels where survival might be threatened by continued harvest or other influences.
7. We recognise that the FAO Panel were not able to support the listing of these species due to the fact that they saw insufficient evidence of an 80 % decline across the ocean basins. There was a new stock assessment carried out in May 2019 which indicated that the North Atlantic stock will continue to decline until at least 2035, even if fishing ceases immediately. This means that, within 10 years, this population will descend below the level that qualifies for Appendix II, unless there are significant decreases in catches. We believe listing in Appendix II is consistent with the application of the CITES-listing criteria for other species as well as with some views of the FAO panel.
8. Scientific projection furthermore show this species could globally quickly meet the criteria to be listed in Appendix I. We could avoid arriving at this stage by acting now to list these species in Appendix II. This would help to achieve better management and more sustainable fisheries to support the conservation of the species, and to ensure it can continue to supply those local communities which rely on it.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 77 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Proposal No: 43 Agenda item: Glaucostegus spp.(Guitarfishes) ) – Include in Appendix II Proponent: Bangladesh, Benin, Bhutan, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Cabo Verde, Chad, Côte d'Ivoire, Egypt, European Union, Gabon, Gambia, Maldives, Mali, Mauritania, Monaco, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Palau, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Sri Lanka, Syrian Arab Republic, Togo and Ukraine
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. Giant guitarfishes are overfished in most of the ocean and seas where they live. They are susceptible to multiple fishing gear types, in a geographic range along some of the world's most heavily fished coastal waters. They are caught by artisanal and commercial fisheries, both as target species and as bycatch. There is unsustainable and unregulated fisheries mortality throughout their range.
3. Giant guitarfishes have low productivity and thus have a low resilience. Such species are very sensitive to overfishing.
4. There are currently no appropriate management measures in place to ensure the sustainable use of this resource (for local communities) or to support the conservation of these species in the wild. The IUCN determined that regulation of trade is required to ensure that harvest from the wild is not reducing populations to levels where survival might be threatened by continued harvest or other influences.
5. Giant Guitarfishes have a specific trade category ("Qun Chi") in the Hong Kong shark fin retail market, the global hub of the shark fin trade, and this trade category has the highest value of any fin type in trade. There is an important and very valuable international trade in these species, which increases the risk of unsustainable fishing.
6. There is extremely limited national and international management to protect these species from overexploitation. In the most recent IUCN Red List assessment, all six of the species were said to have undergone declines of greater than 80% over the past three generations.
7. We recognise that the FAO Panel were not able to come to a conclusion on the application of the criteria to these species, due to insufficient evidence – but recommended that Parties note the widespread lack of management and the high value of fins in international trade. We believe listing in Appendix II is consistent with the views of the FAO panel and provides safeguards to reduce the risk of over-exploitation whilst such management measures are addressed.
8. As Giant guitarfishes live in sandy costal habitats, they are often found in national waters. The implementation of this listing should not be complicated by the context of international waters where those species do not belong.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 78 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Proposal No: 44 Agenda item: Rhinidae spp. (Wedgefishes) ) – Include in Appendix II Proponent: Bangladesh, Benin, Bhutan, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Cabo Verde, Chad, Côte d'Ivoire, Egypt, Ethiopia, European Union, Fiji, Gabon, Gambia, India, Jordan, Kenya, Lebanon, Maldives, Mali, Mexico, Monaco, Nepal, Niger, Nigeria, Palau, Philippines, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, Seychelles, Sri Lanka, Sudan, Syrian Arab Republic, Togo and Ukraine
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States.
2. Guitarfish and wedgefish are often landed and traded together, so very similar threats are facing both species.
3. Wedgefish are overfished in most of the oceans and seas where they live. They are susceptible to multiple fishing gear types, in a geographic range along some of the world's most heavily fished coastal waters. They are caught by artisanal and commercial fisheries, both as target species and as bycatch. They are subject to unsustainable and unregulated fishing throughout their range.
4. Wedgefish have low productivity and thus have a low resilience. Those species are very sensitive to overfishing.
5. There are currently no appropriate management measures in place to ensure the sustainable use of this resource (for local communities) or to support the conservation of those species in the wild.
6. Like guitarfish, wedgefish have a specific trade category ("Qun Chi") in the Hong Kong shark fin retail market, the global hub of the shark fin trade, and this trade category has the highest value of any fin type in trade. As their fins are so valuable, trade must be regulated to stop over-harvesting from the wild.
7. There is extremely limited national and international management for Wedgefishes to protect these species from overfishing. In the most recent IUCN Red List assessment, eight of the species were said to have undergone declines of greater than 80% over the past three generations.
8. We recognise that the FAO Panel were not able to come to a conclusion on the application of the criteria to these species, due to insufficient evidence – but recommended that Parties note the widespread lack of management and the high value of fins in international trade. We believe listing in Appendix II is consistent with the views of the FAO panel and provides safeguards to reduce the risk of over-exploitation whilst such management measures are addressed.
9. As wedgefish live in sandy costal habitats, they tend to be found in national waters. The implementation of this listing should not be complicated by the context of international waters where those species do not belong.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 79 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Proposal No: 45 Agenda item: Holothuria (Microthele) fuscogilva, Holothuria (Microthele) nobilis, Holothuria (Microthele) whitmaei (Teat fishes) – Include in Appendix II Proponent: European Union, Kenya, Senegal, Seychelles and United States of America
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States. We are glad to present you the Proposal 45 for the inclusion of 3 species of Teat fishes belonging to the subgenus Microthele : Holothuria fuscogilva, Holothuria nobilis and Holothuria whitmaei.
2. Teatfishes play an important role in the Indo-Pacific region being among the many invertebrates that have been fished more than a thousand years. Their exploitation has risen for the last 25 years to satisfy growing international markets for sea cucumbers. Teatfishes are some of the most fished and poached Sea cucumbers in the tropical Indo-pacific region. Their high commercial value, their ease of capture and their vulnerability (low mobility of adults, late sexual maturity, density-dependent reproduction and low recruitment rates) encourage their overexploitation and therefore contribute to stocks shrinking seen in some areas. Their ease of capture is because adults are large, often diurnal, easy see and pick upand do not require complex fishing or processing methods Despite the size of their geographical range, most of them prefer very specific habitats with an important role in their ecosystems : they regulate water quality, by digging sediments, by recycling nutrients and being preys to commercialized species that are, especially, crustacean. Their overexploitation induces a cascading effect in the ecosystem.
3. One major challenge is the recognition of those species by enforcement authorities. Teatfishes have a common morphological characteristic that makes them hard to distinguish one another but easy to identify from other sea cucumbers species: they have lateral protuberances (teat- like) that are easily visible on the tegument.
4. Biological and commercial data clearly strongly suggest that Teatfishes should be included in the CITES appendix II. Sea Cucumbers are mostly exported to central marketsin China or Singapore, then re-exported around the world. This inclusion will permit Parties to manage and sustain their trade in the interest of fishermen (from local community as well), exporters and importers, while preserving these species and therefore letting them play their ecological role, to meet future generations’ needs.
5. The assessment by IUCN-TRAFFIC, the final assessment by the CITES Secretariat (Doc. 105.1 Annex 1), as well as the assessment of the sixth FAO expert advisory panel concluded that the three species qualify for inclusion in the CITES Appendix II.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 80 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Proposal No: 46 Agenda item: Poecilotheria spp.(Ornamental spiders) – Include in Appendix II Proponent: Sri Lanka and United States of America
1. Thank you Chair. I am speaking on behalf of the EU and its Member States. We have listened carefully to the debate and the points made by those in favour, and those opposed to, the listing.
2. On this occasion, we would like to encourage the range states to list the species in Appendix III.
3. An Appendix III listing would allow Parties to gain a more complete understanding of the level of international trade and its effects on the decline of the species.
------
Proposal No: 47 Agenda item: Achillides chikae hermeli (Mindoro peacock swallowtail) – Include in Appendix I Proponent: European Union and Philippines
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States. We are glad to speak about Proposal 47 for the inclusion of Achillides chikae hermeli, subspecies of Achillides chikae in Appendix I and the adoption of Page and Treadaway (2004) as standard nomenclatural reference.
2. In 1965 a new butterfly species Achillides chikae was described from Mount Santo Tomás by Igarashi in the Philippines. This endemic species only occurs in the island of Luzon. This butterfly was listed in Appendix I at CoP 6 in Ottawa in 1987. Nowadays this butterfly still meets the appendix I criteria. In 1992, five years after this listing, Nyuda described a new butterfly from another territory of the Philippines : Achillides hermeli. This butterfly is endemic to the island of Mindoro. Achillides hermeli, is morphologically very close to Achillides chikae. According to the butterfly list of Treadaway published in 2004 and some more recent studies, the two butterflies are now considered subpecies of the same species. We have now to face the challenging situation of a species with two subspecies, with a true look alike problem, but only one of them is listed in Appendix I and the other is not listed at all.
3. This opens doors for illegal trade in the appendix 1 listed subspecies under the name of the non-listed subspecies. Cases of import into the EU have been made of the listed subspecies under the name of the non-listed subspecies. Prices of both -the listed and non-listed butterfly are very high.
14741/19 LZ/mb 81 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
4. The differentiation of male specimen of both butterfly subspecies (Achillides chikae chikae and Achillides chikae hermeli) is not possible for enforcement authorities. This proposal would solve this problem. Based on look-alike reasons the non-listed subspecies butterfly (Achillides chikae hermeli) meets the criterion A of Annex 2 b of Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP17) for inclusion in Appendix II.
5. In accordance with Annex 3 of Resolution Conf. 9.24) Rev. CoP17, the split listing of subspecies should be avoided, and as such this proposal aims to have the two subspecies listed in the same Appendix. As Achillides chikae chikae truly meets the criteria for being listed in Appendix I, we propose the inclusion of Achillides chikae hermeli in Appendix I.
------
Proposal No: 48 Agenda item: Parides burchellanus (Riverside swallowtail) – Include in Appendix I Proponent: Brazil
1. Thank you, Mr Chair. I speak on behalf of the EU and its Member States. Thank you to the Brazil delegation for this very relevant proposal.
2. We strongly and fully support Proposal 48 on the Riverside swallowtail’s listing in Appendix I.
3. This species is endemic to Brazil, and a very few populations are remaining with very low amount of specimens.
4. The species is easily distinguishable from other species of its genus.
5. Whereas the species is already legally protected in Brazil, the international trade is increasing. The specimens in trade have been illegally harvested.
6. In our assessment, the species meets 6 criterions for the appendix I (Criterions A (i, ii, v) and B (i, iii, iv) of the article II, paragraph 1 of the Res Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP17)).
------
Proposal No: 51 Agenda item: Dalbergia sissoo – Delete from Appendix II Proponent: Bangladesh, Bhutan, India and Nepal
1. The EU and its Member States recognise that the Indian population of the species is unlikely to meet criterion 2a for inclusion in Appendix II.
2. There is however in our view a lack of practical identification material to differentiate this species from other species of this genus in trade, and a risk of confusion with other Dalbergia species.
14741/19 LZ/mb 82 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
3. While we would like to thank India, Bangladesh, Bhutan and Nepal for the additional information provided around this proposal, we oppose the removal of Dalbergia sissoo from Appendix II due to the difficulty in timber identification in the genus Dalbergia and the reasons indicated by previous speakers.
4. We support the IUCN, TRAFFIC and Secretariat’s analyses that the species meets the look- alike criterion for listing in Appendix II, and in line with this assessment, we would note that removing Dalbergia sissoo from Appendix II is likely to create related implementation challenges for customs and enforcement authorities.
Align ourselves with Nigeria, US, Tchad, Egypt, TH, CH
------
Proposal No: 52 Agenda item: Dalbergia spp., Guibourtia demeusei, Guibourtia pellegriniana, Guibourtia tessmannii – Amend annotation #15 Proponent: Canada and European Union
1. The EU and its Member States are concerned about the several implementation challenges faced since the entry into force of Annotation #15 in January 2017, particularly concerning its interpretation and enforcement.
2. [As indicated by Canada] Listing proposal 52 simply corresponds to the consensus recommendation adopted by the Standing Committee at its 70th meeting, and we strongly believe that it corresponds to the best compromise Parties can achieve at this stage. At the same time, we believe that this revised annotation maintains the focus of CITES controls on those products that have an impact on the conservation of Dalbergia and Guibourtia species.
3. Since SC70, Canada and the EU have become aware of a number of questions raised by some Parties on the terms used in the proposal, and other implementation and enforcement considerations. Canada and the EU therefore submitted Information Document Cop18 Inf.29 to provide clarifications and propose guidance on the terms used in the proposed revised Annotation #15. We would in particular propose definitions of the new terms of Annotation #15 with a view to including these definitions in the Interpretation Section of the Appendices. We are convinced that adoption of these definitions will allow for smooth implementation of the new annotation after CoP18. If you wish so, Chair, I would be happy to read out these definitions.
4. We trust that the adoption of this amended Annotation will help Parties addressing the many implementation challenges faced since CoP17, and that the proposed guidance on the terms used will ensure consistent implementation of this listing across all Parties. We trust that the revised annotation will continue to provide effective protection and support conservation of the Rosewood species currently listed under Annotation #15.
14741/19 LZ/mb 83 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
5. [Alternatively, the definitions could be kept separate and read out later on based on the Chair reaction – keep point 6 closing remarks in mind]: 4 defintions
a. For the term “item” (paragraph b), Canada and the EU propose the following definition: “An individual article or unit, including one that is part of a list, collection, or set and that requires no further processing or alteration and may only require packaging to be ready for retail sale.” b. For the term “finished musical instruments”, we would propose the following definition: “a musical instrument (as referenced by the Harmonized System of the World Customs Organization Chapter 92; (semicolon) musical instruments, parts and accessories of such articles) that is ready to play or needs only the installation of parts to make it playable. This term includes antique instruments (as defined by Harmonized System Codes 97.05 and 97.06; Works of art, collectors' pieces and antiques).” c. For the term “finished musical instrument parts”, we would propose the following definition: “a part (as referenced by the Harmonized System of the World Customs Organization Chapter 92; (semicolon) musical instruments, parts and accessories of such articles) of a musical instrument that is ready to install and is specifically designed and shaped to be used explicitly in association with the instrument to make it playable.” d. For the term “finished musical instrument accessories”, we would propose the following definition: “a musical instrument accessory (as referenced by the Harmonized System of the World Customs Organization Chapter 92; (semicolon) musical instruments, parts and accessories of such articles) that is separate from the musical instrument, and is specifically designed or shaped to be used explicitly in association with an instrument, and that requires no further modification to be used.”
------
Proposal No: 53 Agenda item: Pericopsis elata – Expand the scope of the annotation Proponent: Côte d’Ivoire and European Union
1. Thank you, Chair.
2. As one of the main importers of this timber species, the EU and its Member States would firstly like to congratulate Côté d'Ivoire for having accepted to bring forward this proposal with courage and determination.
3. As Côte d’Ivoire mentioned in its introduction, the EU and its Member States are proposing to amend the annotation applying to the timber species Pericopsis elata, commonly known as Afrormosia or Assamela.
4. We would also like to draw the attention of the Parties to the Information Document CoP18 Inf 20 that provides further details to the proposal.
14741/19 LZ/mb 84 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
5. Trade information compiled to date has shown multiple cases of international trade in transformed Afrormosia. These shipments are currently not covered by CITES provisions as they y fall outside the scope of annotation #5. This also means that these exports are not included in the annual export quota nor in the non-detriment-findings made for the species, and could thus undermine the sustainability of trade in this species. These shipments of sometimes very superficially transformed wood are frequently observed, and importers in EU Members States were faced with several implementation questions as to whether such shipments would require CITES permits. This would be resolved with the amendment of this annotation.
6. We would like to further stress that it is not our intention to amend the annotation applying to other timber species than Pericopsis elata.This proposal will therefore only result in the creation of a new annotation for Pericopsis elata, and would not affect the listing of other timber species currently listed under annotation #5.
7. Our proposal is also directly based on the Harmonized System of the World Customs Organisation, and more particularly on HS Code 44.09, corresponding to transformed wood, in line with Resolution Conf.10.13 (rev. CoP15) on timber species. This will also simplify the work of enforcement officers such as customs as they are used to working with these HS codes when checking the legality of specimens in trade.
Mr Chair, we have noted the concerns express by the CITES Secretariat that our proposal presents the definition of the term “transformed wood” in a footnote to the annotation. We would therefore like to amend our initial proposal, and delete the footnote that currently appears in the draft annotation to define the term “transformed wood”. We propose instead to include the definition of this term in the Interpretation section of the Appendices. We would suggest the same wording as the one presented in our initial proposal, which reads as follows:“Transformed wood: Wood (including strips, friezes for parquet flooring, not assembled), continuously shaped (tongued, grooved, v-joined, beaded or the like) along any edges or faces, whether or not planed, sanded or end-jointed (HS code 44.09).” Together with Côte d’Ivoire, we are convinced that this amendment of the annotation applying to Pericopsis elata is needed to control those specimens that are dominating the trade and the demand for the wild resource, in line with Resolution. Conf. 11.21 (Rev. CoP17). As part of the main importers of this species, the EU and its Member States are committed to support sustainable international trade in this species. Over the years, we have worked in partnership with Pericopsis elata range states, whom we know have invested significant efforts into the conservation of the species, including through the CITES Tree Species Programme. We strongly believe that this proposal will help CITES Parties ensuring the sustainability of international trade in the species, and we look forward to Parties’ support to our proposal.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 85 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Proposal No: 54 Agenda item: Pterocarpus tinctorius – Include in Appendix II Proponent: Malawi
1. The EU and its Member States support the proposal to include Pterocarpus tinctorius in CITES Appendix II.
2. We are concerned that significant trade levels as well as extirpation in some range states have been observed. [As indicated by previous speakers] we believe that the species meets the biological and trade criteria for listing in Appendix II. Exploitation and related international trade are significant threats to the conservation of Pterocarpus tinctorius, with illegal logging having boomed over the last years. The listing in CITES will in our view provide leverage to combat this illegal trade.
3. We also support Malawi’s proposal to include annotation #6 restricting the listing of the species.
4. [We note that the proposal was submitted without an annotation, and that all parts and derivatives would be covered by CITES controls if the proposal was adopted. In line with Resolution Conf. 11.21 (Rev. CoP17), we would recommend that CITES should only cover products that appear first in international trade. We would therefore propose inclusion of an annotation in the proposal]
[options for annotation, read as appropriate/needed]
5. [new #5] We took note of the comments made by the Secretariat regarding proposal 53 on the new annotation for Pericopsis elata, that this new annotation might be appropriate for other tree species as well. We do think that this new annotation is appropriate in this case and therefore we would like to propose to restrict the listing to logs, sawn wood, veneer sheets, plywood and transformed wood.
6. [#7] The Secretariat suggested Annotation #7 for Pterocarpus tinctorius, as Pterocarpus santalinus is already listed with this annotation, restricting the listing to logs, wood chips, powder and extracts. To our knowledge Pterocarpus tinctorius is not traded in the form of wood chips, powder or extracts but rather like other tropical timber species. Therefore, we do not consider Annotation #7 as appropriate.
7. [#6 – compromise] Annotation #6, restricting trade to logs, sawn wood, veneer sheets and plywood, is effective and already in use for several timber species. We therefore consider it an appropriate annotation for Pterocarpus tinctorius.
8. [no annotation – fallback] In the spirit of cooperation, we will not block consensus to list Pterocarpus tinctorius without annotation.
------
14741/19 LZ/mb 86 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Proposal No: 55 Agenda item: Aloe ferox – Ammend annotation #4 Proponent: South Africa
1. The EU and its Member States would like to thank South Africa for its proposal to amend the listing of Aloe ferox.
2. Resolution Conf. 11.21 (Rev. CoP17) para. 6 b) recommends two main principles as standard guidance when drafting annotations for plants: controls should concentrate on those commodities that first appear in international trade and they should include only those commodities that dominate the trade and the demand for the wild resource. If considered by the actual amount of used plant material, the proposed amendment to Annotation #4 is complying with the second of these guiding principles but not with the first principle. Both guiding principles are connected and they have to be seen in combination: CITES control should cover only commodities that dominate trade and that first appear in international trade when being exported from their country of origin. Thus, the guiding principles of the resolution are fulfilled.
3. It is important to note that the proposed amendment will not result in greater numbers of plants being harvested. Therefore, we generally support the proposal.
4. However, given the high amount of trade in derivatives, we propose draft decisions tasking the Secretariat to issue a Notification to gather information and the Plants Committee, based on this information, to monitor the impact of the change proposed by South Africa and the implementation of management measures.
5. The proposed draft decisions [are available in writing in Inf. Doc XX and] would read:
Directed to the Secretariat
18.AA The CITES Secretariat shall issue a Notification to the Parties after one year of the conclusion of CoP18 requesting the following information:
a) whether and if so how the amended Annotation #4 has changed the supply chain characteristics and international trade of Aloe ferox products; and
b) whether and if so how the amended Annotation #4 has affected population size, distribution, status and harvest of Aloe ferox.
18.BB The CITES Secretariat shall compile responses from the Parties as requested under Decision 18.AA and provide these responses to the Plants Committee.
14741/19 LZ/mb 87 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
Directed to the Plants Committee
18.CC The Plants Committee shall review the information received as requested under Decision 18.BB and other relevant information available regarding the status, management, and trade in Aloe ferox, with a view to assessing whether the exemption of finished products of Aloe ferox packaged and ready for retail trade from CITES regulation have had any impacts on the natural populations of the species. Based on the outcome of this review, the Plants Committee shall formulate recommendations concerning the listing of Aloe ferox for consideration at the 19th meeting of the Conference of the Parties.
Directed to the Parties
18.DD Range countries, consumer countries, and other countries involved in the management, propagation, or trade of Aloe ferox are encouraged to provide information regarding the status, management, and trade in this species as requested under Decision 18.AA.
------
Proposal No: 57 Agenda item: Cedrela spp. – Include in Appendix II Proponent: Ecuador
1. The EU and its Member States support inclusion of the genus Cedrela in CITES Appendix II.
2. [We support Ecuador’s view that the species Cedrela odorata meets the biological and trade criteria for listing in Appendix II. We note in particular that the proposal indicates huge volumes of legal and illegal exploitation linked to international trade. We also agree that other Cedrela species should be included on the basis of the look-alike criterion.]
3. We also support Ecuador’s suggestion to include Annotation 6 in the proposal.
4. Additionally, we would like to invite Ecuador to consider restricting the scope of the proposal to the populations of the neotropics, similar to the current listing of Swietenia macrophylla. This would ensure that Cedrela material grown in plantations outside of range states and traded in large volumes is excluded from CITES controls. We further believe that this is likely address the concerns expressed by India, Nepal, Ghana and Côte d’Ivoire.
May help addressing India’s concerns Neotropical populations.
5. [Selective exploitation led to a decline of the populations of Cedrela odorata by almost 30% during the last century and the proposal indicates high volumes of legal and illegal exploitation for international trade.]
6. [As previous speakers] We note that the proposal was submitted without an annotation, and that all parts and derivatives would be covered by CITES controls if the proposal was adopted as initially submitted by Ecuador. In line with Resolution Conf. 11.21 (Rev. CoP17), we would support restricting the listing to products that appear first in international trade.
14741/19 LZ/mb 88 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
[options for annotation, read as appropriate/needed]
[If Ecuador introduces new annotation #5] We therefore strongly support the proposal by Ecuador to restrict the scope of CITES controls to logs, sawn wood, veneer sheet, plywood and transformed wood.
[If Ecuador introduces annotation #6] Looking at potential options for an annotation, we would see benefit in restricting the listing to logs, sawn wood, veneer sheet, plywood and transformed wood. We believe that this annotation presents significant potential for striking the right balance between conservation needs and permitting burden, as highlighted by the Secretariat in their assessment of listing proposal 53. At the same time, we have taken note of Ecuador’s proposal to include annotation #6 in the proposal and can support this suggested way forward.
[If Ecuador proposes annotation #5] Looking at potential options for an annotation, we would see benefit in restricting the listing to logs, sawn wood, veneer sheet, plywood and transformed wood. We believe that this annotation presents significant potential for striking the right balance between conservation needs and permitting burden, as highlighted by the Secretariat in their assessment of listing proposal 53. At the same time, we have taken note of Ecuador’s proposal to include annotation #5 in the proposal and could live with this suggested way forward.
We recognise that synonyms exit for old world taxa such as Cedrela toona which is a synonym of the modern genus Toona [as per recognised nomenclature literature] and these would be excluded from CITES controls.
------
Closing statement
1. Thank you, Mr Chair,
2. The EU and its Member States are grateful to Switzerland for its warm welcome and excellent organization of this Conference of the Parties.
3. We would like to warmly thank the Secretariat and the committee chairs for their tireless work, as well as you, Mr Chair, for guiding us through the Plenary sessions. We would also like to thank all Parties for good collaboration.
4. The agenda for this Conference was ambitious. We are extremely happy with the results achieved. They demonstrate that the protection of endangered species is truly a worldwide concern.
5. We may have different perspectives on how best to protect those species but we all share a common commitment to act to improve their conservation.
14741/19 LZ/mb 89 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR
6. When we return home, we will all have a lot of work on our plate to implement the ambitious decisions we have agreed here in Geneva. The EU and its Member States stand ready to continue to support our partners in this challenging work.
7. Thank you Costa Rica for hosting the next Conference of the Parties. We look forward to seeing all of you there in 2022.
8. Thank you, Mr Chair!
14741/19 LZ/mb 90 ANNEX TREE.1.A EN/FR