Review of species selected on the basis of the Analysis of the European Union and candidate countries’ annual reports to CITES 2011 (Version edited for public release) Prepared for the European Commission Directorate General Environment Directorate E - Global & Regional Challenges, LIFE ENV.E.2. – Global Sustainability, Trade & Multilateral Agreements by the United Nations Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre November, 2013 UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre 219 Huntingdon Road Cambridge CB3 0DL United Kingdom Tel: +44 (0) 1223 277314 Fax: +44 (0) 1223 277136 Email: [email protected] Website: www.unep-wcmc.org The United Nations Environment Programme PREPARED FOR World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP- WCMC) is the specialist biodiversity assessment The European Commission, Brussels, Belgium centre of the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), the world’s foremost DISCLAIMER intergovernmental environmental organisation. The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect The Centre has been in operation for over 30 years, the views or policies of UNEP, contributory combining scientific research with practical policy organisations or editors. The designations advice. The Centre's mission is to evaluate and employed and the presentations do not imply the highlight the many values of biodiversity and put expressions of any opinion whatsoever on the part authoritative biodiversity knowledge at the centre of UNEP, the European Commission or of decision-making. Through the analysis and contributory organisations, editors or publishers synthesis of global biodiversity knowledge the concerning the legal status of any country, territory, Centre provides authoritative, strategic and timely city area or its authorities, or concerning the information for conventions, countries and delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The organisations to use in the development and mention of a commercial entity or product in this implementation of their policies and decisions. publication does not imply endorsement by UNEP. UNEP-WCMC provides objective and scientifically rigorous procedures and services. These include © Copyright: 2013, European Commission 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. 2013. Review of species selected on the basis of the Analysis of the European Union and candidate countries’ annual reports to CITES 2011 . UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge. Table of Contents Introduction to the species sheets ......................................................................................................................... 4 SPECIES: Python regius ....................................................................................................................................... 5 SPECIES: Ornithoptera croesus ......................................................................................................................... 11 SPECIES: Ornithoptera rothschildi .................................................................................................................... 15 Annex I: Introduction to the Analysis of the European Union Annual Reports to CITES ......................... 19 Annex II: Key to purpose and source codes ...................................................................................................... 20 Introduction Introduction to the species sheets On the basis of the Analysis of the European Union and candidate countries’ annual report to CITES 2011, three taxa were originally selected for review on the basis of noteworthy trends in trade (see Annex I for methodology). An additional species was recommended for review by a Member State. One Annex B taxon, Gonystylus bancanus from Malaysia, was initially considered as a candidate for review. This species was selected on the basis of high volume of trade and a sharp increase (12-fold) in trade in 2011. However, it was later confirmed that trade figures reported by the main importer contained an error and that actual trade was 1000-fold lower than reported, which resulted in the species no longer qualifying under the sharp increase of trade criterion, and a review was therefore no longer considered to be required. Two taxa from Indonesia, Ornithoptera croesus and O. rothschildi , were also selected, but it was recommended that previous reviews be revisited, due to outstanding answers from the range state. In addition, Python regius from Ghana was selected at SRG 65 upon request from one of the Member states as the conservation status had not been assessed recently, and quotas appeared to been consistently exceeded. In total, three species were selected by the SRG for review. Python regius REVIEW OF SPECIES SELECTED ON THE BASIS OF THE 2011 ANALYSIS OF EU ANNUAL REPORTS REPTILIA PYTHONIDAE SPECIES: Python regius SYNONYMS: Boa regia, Cenchris regia, Enygrus regius, Hortulia regia, Python bellii COMMON NAMES: Koningspython (Dutch), Ball Python (English), Royal Python (English), Python royal (French), Pitón real (Spanish), Kungspyton (Swedish) RANGE STATES: Benin, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Central African Republic, Chad, Côte d'Ivoire, Democratic Republic of the Congo, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea Bissau, Liberia, Mali, Niger, Nigeria, Senegal, Sierra Leone, Sudan, South Sudan, Togo, Uganda RANGE STATE UNDER REVIEW: Ghana IUCN RED LIST: Least Concern PREVIOUS EC OPINIONS: Current positive opinion for ranched specimens from Benin first formed on 20/12/2005 and last confirmed on 03/12/2010. Current negative opinion for wild specimens from Benin first formed on 20/12/2005 and confirmed on 12/06/2006. Current Article 4.6(b) import restriction for wild specimens from Benin first applied on 03/09/2008 and last confirmed on 11/07/2013. Previous Article 4.6 (b) import restriction for ranched specimens from Benin first applied on 22/12/1997 and removed on 21/11/1998. Current positive opinion for Cameroon formed on 25/10/2005. Current positive opinion for wild specimens from Ghana was formed on 12/03/2009 and current positive position for ranched specimens from Ghana was formed on 29/02/2008 and confirmed on 15/09/2008. Previous positive opinion for wild specimens from Ghana was formed on 27/03/2007 and removed on 14/09/2007. Previous positive opinion for ranched specimens from Ghana was formed on 02/09/1997 and removed on 14/09/2007. Current negative opinion for wild specimens from Guinea formed on 20/03/2002. Current Article 4.6(b) import restriction for wild specimens from Guinea first applied on 10/05/2006 and last confirmed on 11/07/2013. Python regius Current positive opinion for ranched specimens from Togo first formed on 20/12/2005 and last confirmed on 15/09/2008. Current positive opinion for wild specimens from Togo first formed on 12/06/2006 and last confirmed on 15/09/2008. Previous negative opinion for wild specimens from Togo formed on 20/12/2005. Previous Article 4.6(b) import restriction for wild specimens from Central African Republic, Congo, Equatorial Guinea, Gabon and Liberia first applied on 22/12/1997 and removed on 24/09/2000. Previous Article 4.6(b) import restriction for ranched/captive-bred specimens from Togo first applied on 22/12/1997 and removed on 21/11/1998. TRADE PATTERNS: Ghana : Ghana published CITES export quotas for live, wild-sourced Python regius every year 2003- 2012; additional quotas were published for live, ranched specimens every year with the exception of 2006 and 2007, and for live, captive-bred specimens every year 2008-2012 (Table 1). No quotas were published in 2013. The export quota for wild-sourced specimens appears to have been exceeded in 2005 and 2011 according to data reported by Ghana only, in 2006 according to data reported by importers only and in 2008 according to data reported by Ghana and by importers. Analysis of permits revealed that of the 8075 wild-sourced specimens reported by importers in 2006, 898 were imported with export permits that were reported by Ghana in its annual report for 2005, suggesting that the 2006 quota may not have been exceeded; however, Ghana’s annual report for 2006 has not yet been received. Permit analysis suggested that the apparent wild-sourced quota excess in 2008 could not be explained by the export permits reported by importers having been issued the previous year. The quota for ranched specimens was exceeded in every year 2003-2005 and in 2008 according to both exporter- and importer-reported data, and in 2009-2010 according to data reported by Ghana only. The quota for captive-bred specimens was exceeded in every year 2008-2011 according to importer- reported data only. Table 1. CITES export quotas for live, wild-sourced, ranched and captive-bred Python regius from Ghana and global direct exports by source, as reported by the importers and exporter, 2003-2012. (No quotas were published in 2013; Ghana’s annual report for 2006 has not yet been received. Source 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 W Quota 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 7000 Reported by Importer 5628 5705 6982 8075 4060 15212 5466 2668 3218 163 Exporter 5041 6151 11482 3087 8532 6070 5377 8010 1575 R Quota 40000 40000 40000 50000 60000 60000 60000 60000 Reported by Importer 45660 47357 95111 90785 87691 71781 51231 38151 44986 12820 Exporter 48010 55530 137952 61314 77830 65769 61557 59682 39290 C Quota 200 200 200 200 200 Reported by Importer 510 960 1320