Analysis of 2012 CITES export quotas (Version edited for public release) Prepared for the European Commission Directorate General Environment ENV.E.2. – Environmental Agreements and Trade by the United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre May 2012 UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre PREPARED FOR 219 Huntingdon Road Cambridge The European Commission, Brussels, Belgium CB3 0DL United Kingdom DISCLAIMER Tel: +44 (0) 1223 277314 Fax: +44 (0) 1223 277136 The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect Email: [email protected] the views or policies of UNEP or contributory Website: www.unep-wcmc.org organisations. The designations employed and the presentations do not imply the expressions of any ABOUT UNEP-WORLD CONSERVATION MONITORING CENTRE opinion whatsoever on the part of UNEP, the European Commission or contributory The UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre organisations concerning the legal status of any (UNEP-WCMC), based in Cambridge, UK, is the country, territory, city or area or its authority, or specialist biodiversity information and assessment concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or centre of the United Nations Environment boundaries. Programme (UNEP), run cooperatively with WCMC, a UK charity. The Centre's mission is to evaluate and highlight the many values of © Copyright: 2012, European Commission biodiversity and put authoritative biodiversity knowledge at the centre of decision-making. Through the analysis and synthesis of global biodiversity knowledge the Centre provides authoritative, strategic and timely information for conventions, countries and organisations to use in the development and implementation of their policies and decisions. The UNEP-WCMC provides objective and scientifically rigorous procedures and services. These include ecosystem assessments, support for the implementation of environmental agreements, global and regional biodiversity information, research on threats and impacts, and the development of future scenarios. CITATION UNEP-WCMC (2012). Analysis of 2012 CITES export quotas. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge. Contents 1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 2 2. Species with new, increased or decreased quotas in 2012 ........................................................................ 2 2.1. Acipenseriformes ..................................................................................................................................... 2 2.2. Other species (non Acipenseriformes) .................................................................................................. 2 Table 1. Species subject to newly established quotas in 2012. ....................................................................... 5 Table 2. Species subject to increased quotas in 2012. ...................................................................................... 7 Table 3. Species subject to decreased quotas in 2012. ................................................................................... 10 1. Introduction Export quotas are usually established by each Party to CITES unilaterally on a voluntary basis, but they can also be set by the Conference of the Parties or result from recommendations of the Animals and Plants Committees. For Acipenseriformes species, the COP indicated that quotas should be established and communicated to the Secretariat for meat and caviar from stocks shared between different Range States [Resolution Conf. 12.7 (Rev. CoP14)]. Guidance on the use of export quotas is available through Resolution Conf. 14.7 (Rev. CoP15) on the Management of nationally established export quotas. To ensure that national quotas are effectively communicated, countries should inform the CITES Secretariat when they establish national export quotas for CITES species (Resolution Conf. 12.3 [Rev. CoP15]). In turn the Secretariat informs the Parties. Early each year, the Secretariat publishes a Notification to the Parties containing a list of export quotas of which it has been informed. Quotas generally relate to a calendar year (1 January to 31 December); however, since 2008 sturgeon quotas have related to a quota year (1 March to last day of February). In 2012, quotas were published on the CITES website (www.cites.org) on 29/02/2012. There were no quota updates during production of this report (report finalised on 4th May 2012). This report analyses the 2012 CITES export quotas to identify any changes in quotas between 2011 and 2012 and then to review how these changes might affect the status of the species or its area of distribution. First the report outlines: a) Quotas that were newly established in 2012 (i.e. 2012 quotas for particular species/country/term/source combinations which have not previously been subject to a quota, or have not been subject to a quota for at least the last 5 years); b) Quotas that increased or decreased in 2012 compared with 2011 quotas (or compared with 2010 quotas if no quota was published in 2011). 2. Species with new, increased or decreased quotas in 2012 2.1. Acipenseriformes As of 4th May 2012, no sturgeon quotas have been published. Therefore, as per the recommendations detailed in Resolution Conf. 12.7 (Rev. CoP14), if no quotas have been communicated to the CITES Secretariat by 31st December of the previous year, “the relevant range States have a zero quota until such time as they communicate their quotas in writing to the Secretariat and the Secretariat in turn informs the Parties.” Given the zero quotas, it is suggested that no species reviews are needed at present. However, should any sturgeon quotas be published, further analysis may be necessary. 2.2. Other species (non Acipenseriformes) An overview of newly established, increased and decreased quotas in 2012 is presented in Tables 1, 2 and 3, respectively. On the basis of this analysis, species have been identified where the new or increased quotas in 2012 indicate that further discussion might be necessary to determine whether the trade may have a harmful effect on the conservation status of the species or on the extent of the territory occupied by the relevant population of the species. Species that potentially warrant review include: o Guyana published new quotas of 100 live individuals for Clelia clelia and Cyclagras gigas. Neither of these snake species has been assessed by the IUCN. 2 o Eryx miliaris / Uzbekistan: Uzbekistan published a new quota for 50 live individuals. This snake species has not been assessed by the IUCN. o Kinixys erosa / Democratic Republic of the Congo: The DRC increased its quota for this Data Deficient species six-fold from 500 live individuals in 2011 to 3000 in 2012. A final list of species for review will be agreed, pending comments from the SRG. 2.2.1. Previously reviewed species of potential concern The following species/country combinations may be of potential concern; however, they have been reviewed recently and therefore a review may not be necessary at this stage: o Swietenia macrophylla / Honduras: Honduras published a quota for this Vulnerable species for the first time in 2012, of 4066.70 m3. This species was selected for CITES Review of Significant Trade at the 17th meeting of the Plants Committee, and Honduras was categorised as ‘Possible Concern’ (PC19 Summary Record) following concerns over the sustainability of trade (including illegal trade) (PC19 Doc. 12.3). For countries of ‘Possible Concern’, Management Authorities were required within six months to inform the Secretariat of the methodology currently being used for making non-detriment assessments and to establish a conservative harvest and export quota. The Commission may wish to contact Honduras to request this information on non-detriment findings. o Phelsuma lineata / Madagascar: Madagascar increased its export quota for this Least Concern species from 2000 in 2011 to 3000 in 2012. P. lineata was reviewed in a SRG 38 document, following which a positive opinion was formed on 26/09/2006. The species was later reviewed in a SRG 45 document, where it was reported to be widespread, common and to be abundant in degraded forests and cultivated and urbanised areas. o Hirudo verbana / Turkey: Turkey increased its export quota for H. verbana from 3000 kg in 2011 to 4000 kg in 2012. However, Turkey previously had quotas of 6000 kg of H. medicinalis 2005-2010 (from which H. verbana split following CoP15). The medicinal leech (H. medicinalis sensu lato) in Turkey was reviewed in a SRG 51 document, following which a positive opinion was formed on 16/02/2010 (originally for H. medicinalis) and confirmed for H. verbana on 03/12/2010. The positive opinions for both H. verbana and H. medicinalis were confirmed on 11/03/2011, based on Turkey’s response to a query regarding the 2011 export quotas. 2.2.2. Other quotas of note Genus level quotas A number of quotas were established at the genus rather than the species level. Of particular note, Fiji published a new quota of 4750 live or dead Trachyphyllia spp. Fiji previously published quotas for T. geoffroyi, including quotas for 4750 pieces, live or dead, 2008-2011. Trachyphyllia is not a coral taxa where identification to genus level is acceptable according to Notification 2010/014. In addition, Veron1 considers T. geoffroyi to be the only species in the genus Trachyphyllia and this species is currently subject to a 4.6(b) import suspension for wild specimens. In 2012, Malaysia