Read in: French

Summary report, 10–20 April 2000

11th Meeting of the CITES Conference of the Parties (COP11)

The eleventh Conference of the Parties (COP-11) to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) convened from 10-20 April 2000, at UNEP Headquarters in Nairobi, Kenya, drawing together approximately 2100 participants representing governments, NGOs, and IGOs. Delegates at COP-11 considered 62 proposals to amend Appendices I and II as well as over 40 resolutions on a wide range of topics, including: the evolution of the Convention; financial matters; conservation of and trade in tigers, elephants, rhinoceros, and Tibetan Antelopes; and trade in bears, freshwater turtles and tortoises, seahorses, and traditional medicines.

Most delegates were satisfied with the outcome of COP-11 and championed the compromise reached on African Elephants as the triumph of COP-11. The rejection of proposals to downlist populations of Gray and Minke Whale and the Hawksbill Turtle was also characterized as a success by many, but this view was not unanimous, reflecting the underlying conflicts within CITES between issues related to conservation and trade.


During the 1960s, countries became increasingly aware that over-exploitation of wildlife through international trade was contributing to the rapid decline of many plant and animal species. In 1963, the World Conservation Union (IUCN) began drafting an international convention to regulate the export, transit and import of rare or threatened wildlife species. The international commitment for a convention was established in June 1972, at the UN Conference on the Human Environment in Stockholm, Sweden, which recommended the immediate preparation of an international convention to deal with these issues. The same year, IUCN, the United States and Kenya produced a unified working paper, which became the basis for convention negotiations. The final negotiations were held from 12 February to 2 March 1973 in Washington, DC. CITES was adopted 2 March 1973 and entered into force on 1 July 1975. There are 151 Parties to the Convention.

CITES conservation goals are to: monitor and stop commercial international trade in endangered species; maintain those species under international commercial exploitation in an ecological balance; and assist countries toward a sustainable use of species through international trade. CITES Parties regulate wildlife trade through controls and regulations on species listed in three appendices. Appendix I lists species endangered due to international trade. Their exchange is permitted only in exceptional circumstances. Appendix II species require strictly regulated trade based on quotas and/or permits to prevent their unsustainable use; and controls aimed at maintaining ecosystems and preventing species from becoming eligible for Appendix I. Appendix III species are subject to regulation by a Party who requires the cooperation of other Parties to control their international trade. To list a species, a Party provides a proposal for COP approval containing scientific and biological data on population and trade trends. The proposal must be supported by a two-thirds majority of Parties present and voting at a COP. CITES only lists species whose populations are obviously impacted by international trade. At present, there are 890 species of flora and fauna species in Appendix I; 29,111 in Appendix II, and 241 in Appendix III. Flora species outnumber fauna by approximately seven to one. As the trade impact on a species increases or decreases, the COP decides whether or not the species should be shifted between or removed from appendices.

CITES also regulates international trade through a system of permits and certificates that are required before specimens enter or leave a country. Each Party must adopt national legislation to provide official designation of a Management Authority responsible for issuing these permits and certificates based on the advice of a designated Scientific Authority. Parties maintain trade records that are forwarded to the CITES Secretariat annually, the sum of which enable the Secretariat to compile statistical information on the world volume of trade in listed species. These two designated national authorities also enhance CITES enforcement through cooperation with customs, police, or appropriate agencies.

The operational bodies of CITES include the COP and its Standing Committee, as well as several scientific advisory committees, the Animals Committee, the Plants Committee, the Nomenclature Committee and the Identification Manual Committee. Located in Geneva, the CITES Secretariat interprets Convention provisions, and services the CITES Parties and Committees.


On the eve of COP-11, Sunday, 9 April 2000, delegates met in an official opening ceremony. CITES Secretary-General Willem Wijnstekers opened the conference by noting that CITES has been one of the international environmental conventions with the most direct impact on species conservation. He added that there is a need for applied synergy with other multilateral environmental agreements (MEAs), particularly biodiversity-related MEAs, in order to strengthen the Convention’s capacity and success.

Robert Hepworth (United Kingdom), Chair of the CITES Standing Committee, remarked that approximately six billion humans are dependent on wildlife for food, fuel, medicine and their livelihoods, but refuted the perceived conflict in meeting both human and wildlife needs. He attributed CITES’ success to its practical concept of regulating or prohibiting trade, its ability to evolve, and the hard work of governments in implementing the agreement.

UNEP Executive Director Klaus Töpfer stressed that CITES has evolved into the most significant wildlife conservation tool. He recalled that causes of biodiversity loss, such as poverty and debt, are common knowledge and suggested that a new form of solidarity be created to protect the global commons.

In the opening plenary session on Monday, 10 April, Kenyan President Daniel arap Moi welcomed delegates to Nairobi and identified the biggest challenge in the new millennium as ensuring that CITES both adapts to new areas and emerging issues, and creates synergies with other relevant treaties, especially trade instruments.

Standing Committee Chair Hepworth introduced two amendments to the Rules of Procedure (Doc. 11.1(Rev.2)), which were adopted with minor amendments. He announced the Standing Committee’s nominations for COP-11 officers: Chair, Bagher Asadi (Iran); Vice-Chairs, Emmanuel Severre (Tanzania) and Horace Walters (Saint Lucia); Committee I Chair, Margarita Clemente (Spain); Committee II Chair, Veit Koester (Denmark); Budget Committee Chair, Kenneth Stansell (US); and Credentials Committee Chair, Janet Owen (New Zealand). China, Jordan, Tunisia, the Russian Federation, the US, the Dominican Republic and New Zealand were nominated to serve on the Credentials Committee.

Chair Asadi introduced the list of observers, of 56 international and 129 national organizations. He said that the success of the conference means achieving the best optimal outcomes on issues and disputes. He then introduced, and delegates adopted, the Agenda (Doc. 11.3 (Rev. 1)) and the Programme of Work (Doc. 11.4 (Rev. 1)).


Delegates met in four Plenary sessions on Monday, 10 April, Tuesday, 11 April, and Thursday, 13 April, to discuss strategic and administrative matters. Following Plenary on Tuesday, 11 April, delegates divided into Committees I and II. Committee I, chaired by Margarita Clemente, met in 14 sessions and addressed, inter alia: the procedure for the review of criteria for amendment of Appendices I and II; quotas for species in Appendix I; conservation of and trade in rhinoceroses and elephants; trade in freshwater turtles, seahorses, Bigleaf Mahogany and hard coral; transport of live animals; and proposals to amend Appendices I and II, including whales, elephants, sharks and turtles. Committee II, chaired by Veit Koester, met in 12 sessions to address, inter alia: permanent committees Terms of Reference (TORs); the relationship between CITES and the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the International Whaling Commission (IWC); introduction from the sea; national reports; enforcement; national laws; trade in bear specimens; bushmeat; diagnostic samples; a universal labeling system for the identification of sturgeon specimens; and the information management strategy. The Budget Committee, chaired by Kenneth Stansell, convened in six sessions to consider: the financial report for 1997-1999; external funding; expenditures for 2000; Secretariat staffing; the budget for 2001-2002; and the medium-term plan 2001-2005. Several working groups were convened over the course of COP-11 on tigers, freshwater turtles, hard coral, Bigleaf Mahogany, seahorses, rhinoceros, bears, trade in elephant specimens, introduction from the sea, diagnostic samples and export permits for cosmetics containing caviar.

The following is a summary of proposals and resolutions considered at COP-11 according to the meeting’s agenda.


Delegates heard Committee and Secretariat reports and considered the evolution of the Convention in Plenary. Committee II examined issues relating to CITES relationship with the IWC and FAO and the TORs for permanent committees.

MATTERS RELATED TO THE STANDING COMMITTEE: On Tuesday, 11 April, Standing Committee Chair Hepworth presented the Chair’s Report (Doc. 11.8). He identified challenges, including: reforming the Secretariat; implementing the 1997 "Harare Compromise" on ivory trade; addressing escalating tiger poaching and smuggling; developing the Strategic Plan; and addressing non-compliance of seven Parties. On elephants, he highlighted successes, including: cooperative work with IUCN and TRAFFIC; creation of the Monitoring of Illegal Killing of Elephants (MIKE), Elephant Trade Information System (ETIS) and interim monitoring systems; consensus on conducting ivory auctions; and smooth conduct of trade in Africa and Japan. He said the Technical and High-level Tiger Missions had pinpointed reasons for smuggling tigers. Several delegations commented on the report, which was approved.

REPORTS OF THE SECRETARIAT: On Tuesday, 11 April, CITES Deputy Secretary-General Jim Armstrong introduced, and delegates approved, the Report of the Secretariat (Doc. 11.9.1). Secretary-General Wijnstekers presented the Secretariat report on staffing (Doc. 11.9.2). The Plenary agreed to a UK suggestion to endorse the report after discussion in the Budget Committee.

COMMITTEE REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS: On Tuesday, 11 April, Animals Committee Chair Robert Jenkins (Australia) presented the Committee’s report (Doc. 11.11.1). He underlined a recommendation repealing a resolution on swiftlets, as the scientific research for its implementation is complete, and a recommendation to repeal a resolution on international trade in sharks. He also noted difficulties in compiling a list of animals bred in captivity for commercial purposes, and recommended listing species of critical conservation concern. The report was adopted.

Plants Committee Chair Margarita Clemente (Spain) presented the Committee’s report outlining activities since COP-10 (Doc. 11.11.2), noting that since many of the 25,000 Appendix II species were listed in 1970s, the Committee introduced an ongoing systematic review of the Appendix. She said an identification manual and slides had been sent to Parties to assist them in identifying CITES species. Regarding the work programme through COP-12, she highlighted, inter alia, the need to implement the action plan; continue the review of Appendix II; and improve regional directories. The report was adopted.

Identification Manual Committee Chair Ruth Landolt (Switzerland) presented the Committee’s report (Doc. 11.11.13). She noted that since COP-10 only Switzerland had expressed interest in, and appointed members to, the Committee and that only six countries had submitted fauna data. The report was adopted.

Nomenclature Committee Vice-Chair Marinus Hoogmoed (Netherlands) identified the role of the Committee contained in its report (Doc., including: responding to enquiries on taxa nomenclature, designating appropriate taxonomic authorities; reviewing the nomenclature with the Secretariat; and reviewing the nomenclature of species proposed for listing. Delegates adopted the report.

TERMS OF REFERENCE OF PERMANENT COMMITTEES: The Secretariat introduced several changes to TORs for CITES committees (Doc. 11.13). The proposal seeks to, inter alia, harmonize TOR differences in the Plants and Animals Committees and to translate the TOR into draft resolutions. The resolution, adopted in Plenary (Com. 11.1), calls for increasing Standing Committee membership to three representatives for regions with 31 to 45 Parties or four representatives for regions with more than 45 Parties; undertaking a periodic review of animal or plant species in CITES appendices by consulting Parties and working directly with range States in the selection process; and appointing a zoologist and botanist to the Nomenclature Committee to coordinate and monitor input from specialists.

EVOLUTION OF THE CONVENTION: Strategic Plan: On Thursday, 13 April, the Secretariat introduced, and delegates adopted, the action plan to improve the effectiveness of the Convention (Doc. 11.12.1). Kenneth Stansell, in his capacity as Chair of the Standing Committee working group on the CITES Strategic Plan (Doc. 11.12.2), highlighted a number of priority implementation goals and objectives. Switzerland and the World Conservation Trust expressed concern over the increased workload and its financial implications. Norway, along with South Africa, underlined the importance of strengthening CITES’ scientific basis, and noted the need to cooperate with other conventions. Mexico suggested giving more attention to plant issues. Canada proposed the development of performance measures. The Strategic Plan was adopted.

Cooperation with Other Biodiversity-Related Agreements: Secretary-General Wijnstekers introduced the Standing Committee-endorsed report on cooperation with other biodiversity-related agreements (Doc. 11.12.3) and drew attention to policy areas, including, inter alia, training, capacity building, compliance control, and organizations with which CITES could achieve synergy. Hamdallah Zedan, Executive Secretary of the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), highlighted two important areas for potential cooperation between CITES and the CBD to be considered at CBD COP-5 to be held 15–27 May 2000, in Nairobi. He said new national reporting guidelines and the Strategic Plan, which includes consideration of joint programming, would be important areas of cooperation between the CBD and CITES. Arnulf Müller-Helmbrecht, Secretary-General of the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS), noted that the CMS provides the legal and programmatic basis to conserve migratory species. He suggested that joint programming should be explored and implemented for species listed by both CITES and CMS, and announced that the two conventions will enter into consultation to establish a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). The US cautioned that any process for cooperation with other conventions should not erode trade rules established by CITES. The document was adopted.

Improving the Effectiveness of Financing CITES Implementation: On Thursday, 13 April, France introduced a proposal for improving the effectiveness of financing CITES implementation (Doc. 11.12.4). She suggested creating a Standing Committee working group on a funding mechanism for specific fauna and flora conservation and added that the Secretariat should cooperate with Global Environmental Facility (GEF) when considering requests for financing. Botswana, Cameroon and others supported the document. Japan noted that this new financial mechanism should be voluntary. Chair Asadi established an informal working group to further discuss the issue. On Wednesday, 19 April, France introduced a revised resolution on improving CITES’ effectiveness (Com. 11.33), and noted the Standing Committee will form a working group to, inter alia, inventory existing funding mechanisms for flora and fauna conservation. The resolution was adopted.

SYNERGY WITH THE FAO: The US presented its proposal on synergy with the FAO in developing TORs to review CITES listing criteria for consideration at COP-12 (Doc. 11.14). Some delegates supported the proposal, while others, including Japan, Argentina and Oldepesca opposed, citing duplication with the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) and limited expertise in FAO on some aspects. The US withdrew the proposal.

INTERNATIONAL WHALING COMMISSION: On Tuesday, 11 April, Norway and Japan introduced a proposal urging CITES to use its criteria to list cetaceans in Appendices I and II, taking into account the IWC’s scientific information (Doc. 11.15.1 (Rev.1)), but also noted the IWC currently violates its original legal framework. The US then presented a proposal endorsing cooperation with the IWC on the management of and international trade in whales (Doc. 11.15.2), which several delegations supported, noting the IWC's primacy and CITES’ obligation to cooperate with other international bodies. Iceland opposed giving authority to the IWC. Antigua and Barbuda urged CITES to divorce itself from the IWC. Saint Lucia requested the IWC to lower membership fees. The IWC said a management scheme for sustainable commercial whaling is under way and that proposals to downlist Gray and Minke Whales could negatively impact whale conservation. The US offered to withdraw its proposal providing Norway and Japan withdrew theirs. Norway and Japan’s proposal was rejected on Monday, 17 April, by a secret vote called for by Norway. The US subsequently withdrew its proposal. (For further discussion on whales please refer to the section on consideration of proposals to amend Appendices I and II, page 9.)

CONTRIBUTION OF OBSERVERS: The US introduced, and the Plenary adopted, a resolution recognizing the important contribution made by observers to the CITES process (Doc. 11.16). The resolution recommends the Secretariat make efforts ensuring that each observer is represented in Plenary and Committee sessions and to invite qualified observers to participate in working group meetings


The Budget Committee discussed the financial report for 1997, 1998 and 1999, estimated expenditures for 2000, budget for 2001-2002 and medium-term, and external funding.

FINANCIAL REPORTS: On Friday, 14 April, the Committee approved the financial reports for 1997, 1998 and 1999 and attached annexes detailing each year’s total expenditures (Doc. 11.10.1 (Rev.1)). The US and others asked for clarification on expected over- and under-expenditures of several budget items. Germany and the UK requested better methods to refine future projections. The Secretariat agreed to provide explanations in cases where expenditures exceeded 20% of projected costs.

ESTIMATED EXPENDITURES: On Friday, 14 April, the Committee approved the budget’s estimated expenditures for 2000 (Doc. 11.10.2). The Secretariat suggested external donors provide additional funds for developing capacity-building programmes and training courses.

2001-2002 BUDGET AND MEDIUM-TERM PLAN: On Tuesday, 11 April, Friday, 14 April, and Saturday, 15 April, the Committee discussed the 2001-2002 budget and medium-term plan (Doc. 11.10.3 (Rev.1)). Chair Stansell noted the budget was 13% higher than estimates agreed upon at COP-10 due to increased Secretariat activities and newly approved staff positions. He added that a deficit for 2003 was possible if Parties do not increase their annual contributions. Switzerland, the US and the UK suggested a gradual approach to financing posts and activities. There were also calls for a proposed overall 20% budget reduction. After several revised budget scenarios, the Committee agreed to a budget that approves: four new posts, two funded through the Trust Fund and two through the balance reserve; focusing on programme activity items; and using the balance reserve to offset increased membership contributions.

EXTERNAL FUNDING: On Friday, 15 April, the Committee approved a document on external funding (Doc. 11.10.4) that notes contributions received in addition to regular CITES Trust Fund contributions and special projects initiated with external funding between January 1997 to December 1999. Chair Stansell underlined the importance of external funding, particularly in implementing the recently adopted Strategic Plan. Japan, the largest external funding contributor, emphasized that it could not commit to increased contributions.

FINAL DECISIONS: On Wednesday, April 19, the Plenary adopted the Budget Committee’s draft resolution on Secretariat financing and budgeting (Com. 11.21). The resolution noted that the 2001-2002 biennium budget represents a 26.53% increase from the previous triennium. The increase shall be covered by adjusting Party contributions by 6.1% and the remaining deficit is drawn from the Trust Fund balance. The COP agreed, inter alia, to:

  • expenditures for 1997-1999;
  • approve five new posts, two to be funded through the Trust Fund, two through the reserve balance, and one from additional savings, if available;
  • authorize the Secretariat to draw additional funds from the CITES Trust Fund balance, provided that it is not reduced below 1 million Swiss francs;
  • allocate available savings from the biennium budget to implement capacity building, enforcement and regional coordination activities; and
  • establish priorities for insufficiently funded budget items.


Forty agenda items were considered under interpretation and implementation of the Convention. Committee I primarily dealt with items related to specific species, while Committee II considered implementation items and resolutions to amend decisions. For a detailed breakdown, please refer to the COP-11 work programme (Doc. 11.4).

SPECIES INTRODUCED FROM THE SEA: On Thursday, 13 April, AUSTRALIA introduced its resolution (Doc. 11.18) aiming to: interpret and implement aspects of CITES Articles III, IV and XIV; reach agreement on the meaning of "introduction from the sea" and "not under the jurisdiction of any state;" achieve synergy with other intergovernmental bodies regulating marine stocks; and facilitate commerce of marine species under threat by unregulated and illegal fishing. A working group produced draft resolutions (Conf. 11.17 and Conf. 11.18) providing, inter alia, clearer definition of marine environment not under a State’s jurisdiction, clarification on information requirements, and mechanism refinements for non-detriment findings. The EU, Brazil, Vanuatu, Fiji, Canada and the US supported the proposed draft resolution. Japan, Iceland, Belize, Uruguay, Venezuela, Saint Lucia, China, Mexico, Tunisia, and Norway opposed it. The proposals were rejected by a secret ballot vote on Wednesday, 19 April.

CONSOLIDATION OF VALID RESOLUTIONS: The Plenary adopted a resolution (Doc. 11.17), responding to decision 10.60 calling for the Secretariat to continue consolidating existing COP resolutions and decisions when appropriate. The resolution contains three annexes of draft consolidated resolutions, on: conservation of cetaceans, trade in cetacean specimens and the relationship with the IWC; enforcement and compliance; and resolutions relating to non-commercial loan, donation or exchange of museum and herbarium specimens.

NATIONAL REPORTS REQUIRED UNDER ARTICLE VIII, PARAGRAPH 7(A) OF THE CONVENTION: The Secretariat presented its recommendation to suspend trade in specimens of CITES-listed species for Parties failing to submit annual reports in three consecutive years (Doc. 11.19). Delegates urged the Secretariat to assist member countries to develop national legislation and prepare their reports. Belgium, supported by TRAFFIC, stated the need to distinguish between countries not submitting annual reports in the last three years and late submissions. The proposal was adopted.

ENFORCEMENT: Review of Alleged Infractions: The Secretariat presented the review covering, inter alia, the incidences, enforcement action and analysis of illicit trade, the Global Enforcement Recording System and permit confirmation (Doc. 11.20.1). Delegates noted its utility. The Secretariat elaborated on the work on guidelines for permits and certificates and collaboration with ICPO-Interpol and the World Customs Organization (WCO) on a new computerized data system to curb illicit trade. TRAFFIC suggested compiling information on infraction trends. Spain requested guidelines for identifying false certificates. Belgium noted not all countries have capacity for DNA analysis.

Implementation of Resolutions: The Secretariat introduced, and delegates adopted, a draft decision postponing to the next Standing Committee meeting a discussion of problems Parties have faced implementing existing resolutions (Doc. 11.20.2).

NATIONAL LAWS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF THE CONVENTION: National Legislation Project: The Secretariat presented its overview on measures taken to implement Decisions 10.19, 10.21 and 10.23 and the proposed legal capacity-building strategy (Doc. 11.21.1). Delegates highlighted their needs: Zambia, Liberia and Turkey on capacity building and Iceland on developing national legislation. Cuba requested assistance for small island States, while Argentina proposed provision of technical resources for implementation. Zimbabwe inquired when a sub-regional workshop to harmonize national legislation would take place. The Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF) called for funding for regional workshops. With these amendments, the strategy was adopted.

National Laws for Implementation of CITES: On Wednesday, 12 April, the Secretariat presented a report on measures taken with regard to Parties without adequate legislation (Doc. 11.21.2). Delegates noted the effectiveness of limited trade sanctions in stimulating national legislation development. An informal group comprising Australia, Germany, the David Shepherd Conservation Foundation and the Secretariat was requested to revise a draft decision to ensure its consistency with decisions 10.19 to 10.23 to address concerns raised by Australia regarding fairness of the draft decision. Delegates adopted the draft decision.

REPORTING SEIZURES: On Thursday, 13 April, Israel withdrew its proposal on reporting seizures (Doc. 11.22) in response to delegates’ concern that it would be redundant with resolution 9.9, duplicate efforts and possibly create information leakage.

PERSISTENT OFFENDERS: Israel introduced a draft resolution on persistent CITES offenders (Doc. 11.23) that recommended the Secretariat circulate a list of such offenders and Management Authorities reject CITES permits to persistent offenders. Several delegations opposed the resolution, noting it would infringe on sovereignty and individual rights. Israel withdrew the proposal, but invited interested Parties to cooperate on a revised draft for future consideration.

ANNOTATIONS IN THE APPENDICES: Switzerland outlined its draft resolution (Doc. 11.24) that resulted from decision 10.70, requesting clarification of legal implementation issues related to appendix annotations. Cameroon and Pakistan expressed concern that a provision recommending Parties avoid making annotations, including wild animals and trophies, could negatively impact their sporting or local community interests. The draft resolution was adopted. The resolution directs the Secretariat to inform the Standing Committee, subsequent to adopting a downlisting proposal subject to an annotation, of increases in illegal trade or poaching and for the Standing Committee to investigate.

PROCEDURE FOR THE REVIEW OF CRITERIA FOR AMENDMENT OF APPENDICES I AND II: Delegates adopted the TORs for the review of the criteria for amendment of Appendices I and II (Doc. 11.25). The TORs include data selection and the establishment of a criteria working group of 12 experts. FAO noted its Fisheries Department is currently reviewing CITES criteria for aquatic populations, especially marine populations undergoing commercial exploitation.

DEFINITION OF THE TERM "APPROPRIATE AND ACCEPTABLE DESTINATIONS": On Thursday, 13 April, KENYA introduced a proposal to define "appropriate and acceptable" destinations to the body responsible, in order to eliminate ambiguities that give rise to mistreatment and inappropriate habitats for exported animals. The Fund for Animals Incorporated said this lacuna enhances mistreatment of animals. Some delegates preferred regulation through a binding amendment of relevant annotations in the appendices. The Born Free Foundation, the International Wildlife Coalition and the Animal Welfare Institute supported the resolution. On Tuesday, 18 April, following extensive informal consultations, delegates adopted the revised definition as being where a State’s Scientific Authority is satisfied that a species’ recipient is suitably equipped to house and care for it (Doc. 11.26 (Rev. 1)).

RECOGNITION OF RISKS AND BENEFITS OF TRADE IN WILDLIFE: Kenya introduced the resolution on the impact of unsustainable trade in wildlife conservation (Doc. 11.27). Brazil and Liberia supported the resolution but the EU, Japan, Canada, Cuba, Colombia and Madagascar rejected it, with South Africa evoking national sovereignty over resources. Kenya later withdrew it.

QUOTAS FOR SPECIES IN APPENDIX I: The Secretariat introduced, and delegates took note of, the recommendations for quotas of the Appendix I-listed Leopard (Doc. 11.28.1.rev.1)) and Parties were invited to forward recommendations on the current reporting system, as the reports submitted do not adequately reflect the level of quota management in some exporting countries. Delegates adopted recommendations relating to export quotas granted to Pakistan for the Appendix I-listed Markhor (Doc. 11.28.2). The document: accepts the postponement of Pakistan’s survey report due to climatic conditions; notes the absence of reference to national revenue management; commends Pakistan for its 1998 report; and suggests Pakistan provide information on a sustainable monitoring programme to cover all important Markhor subpopulations.

TRADE IN BEAR SPECIMENS: On Saturday, 15 April, the Secretariat introduced recommendations on bears (Doc. 11.29) requesting Parties to, inter alia, report on action taken to implement resolution 10.8 and to confirm, adopt or improve national legislation to reduce illegal trade in bear parts and derivatives. A working group was established and drafted a resolution, which was adopted on Monday, 17 April.

The resolution (Com. 11.22) directs Parties to, inter alia: report on national legislation to control trade in bear parts; share forensic technology; and evaluate the CITES Tiger Missions for applicability to bears. The Standing Committee is directed to consider illegal trade in bear parts at its 45th and 46th meetings and to report to COP-12 on implementation of resolution 10.8.

CONSERVATION OF AND TRADE IN TIGERS: On Tuesday, 11 April, delegates overviewed the report of the CITES Tiger Mission Technical Team and Political Mission to India, Japan and China (Doc. 11.30). India called for a working group to re-examine recommendations of trade sanctions issued against India. On Thursday, 13 April, in the working group chaired by the US, some delegates agreed that although sanctions might be inappropriate, some form of pressure should be exercised to compel India to improve its tiger conservation. Most delegates agreed to reinstate financial incentives, but agreed that spending should be monitored. On Tuesday, 18 April, delegates adopted a compromise redraft proposal (Com. 11.32). The proposal urges all Parties and non-Parties, especially tiger range and consumer States to adopt comprehensive legislation and enforcement controls, with the aim of eliminating trade in tiger parts, and asks India to establish a specialized unit to combat wildlife crime. It requires the Standing Committee to review, via a targeted programme, the progress of tiger range and consumer States, particularly those reviewed under the Technical and Political Missions. It further replaces the CITES Enforcement Task Force with a Tiger Enforcement Task Force (TETF), whose tasks largely remain the same and, in addition, has a provision for a 90-day withdrawal notice for Parties.


Experimental Trade in Raw Ivory: The Secretariat reported on the results of decision 10.1 on experimental trade in raw ivory (Doc. 11.31.1). He stated that on the basis of eight national reports on illegal killings, the Secretariat had concluded that illegal poaching had not increased in the three range States allowed to trade. He said that in cases where it had, the relationship with authorized trade had not been established. Japan highlighted national efforts to prevent illegal trade. India remarked that national figures indicating increased elephant poaching since 1997 were not reported to the Secretariat. Kenya said the Secretariat had defied the Precautionary Principle in interpreting figures and based its conclusions on erroneous information. The David Shepherd Conservation Foundation said the experimental trade was invalid because, inter alia, decision 10.1 was not discussed before the COP-10 vote and the three trading range States had participated in the Standing Committee’s evaluation, resulting in a conflict of interest. The International Wildlife Coalition questioned the scientific validity of the Secretariat’s conclusions. TRAFFIC contested NGO figures on poaching, suggesting double counting.

Monitoring the Illegal Killing of Elephants: MIKE reported on its work and on the work of the ETIS in monitoring illegal trade and killing of elephants (Doc. 11.31.2). Delegates took note of the document.

Trade in Elephant Specimens: On Monday, 17 April, Kenya introduced a resolution to revise resolution 10.10 on trade in elephant specimens (Doc. 11.31.3 (Rev.1)). A technical working group, chaired by Cameroon, was established to further address the issue. On Wednesday, 19 April, Switzerland introduced the group’s revision of resolution 10.10, noting that the role of range States and capacity building were strengthened. Delegates adopted the revisions that, inter alia, request MIKE and ETIS to build capacity in range States, and provide for COP consideration of information on illegal elephant killing from credible law enforcement and professional resource management sources.

Non-Commercial Disposal of Ivory: Kenya introduced a resolution to modify the terms of non-commercial disposal of ivory stockpiles, established by decision 10.2 (Doc. 11.31.4). She suggested the obligation to establish a trust fund discouraged donors from participating in such disposal and proposed that funds go directly into capacity building instead. Some delegations, including Sudan and India supported the resolution, but others, including the UK and the EU, opposed and Kenya withdrew the proposal. (For further discussion on elephants, please refer to section on consideration of proposals to amend Appendices I and II, page 10.)

CONSERVATION OF AND TRADE IN RHINOCEROSES: On Wednesday, 12 April, the Secretariat introduced a recommendation repealing a rhinoceros resolution adopted at COP-9 (Doc. 11.32). The EU and the US supported amending the resolution and suggested setting up a working group. On Thursday, 13 April, the US highlighted substantial changes in the draft document, including inserting a requirement for Parties to report on rhinoceros conservation efforts and to implement national legislation, and requesting the Secretariat to compile and evaluate the reports. On Wednesday, 19 April, delegates adopted an amended resolution for the conservation of and trade in rhinoceroses (Com. 11.19), which urges Parties to, inter alia: identify, mark and register rhinoceros stocks; implement comprehensive legislation and enforcement controls; increase cooperation among States to curtail illegal trade; and develop strategies for reducing the use and consumption of rhinoceros parts. It further requests Parties to submit a report to the Secretariat six months prior to each COP, detailing, inter alia, the status of captive and wild rhinoceros populations, incidents of illegal hunting, and illegal trade.

VICUÑA WOOL AND CLOTH: Delegates adopted a draft resolution allowing for import of vicuña cloth bearing a trademark stating the country of origin and requesting exporters to provide the Secretariat details of exports (Doc. 11.33).

CONSERVATION AND CONTROL OF TRADE IN THE TIBETAN ANTELOPE: China introduced its proposal calling for stronger measures to curb poaching of the Tibetan Antelope for shahtoosh-processing (Doc. 11.34). India reported a governance arrangement constraining regulation of shahtoosh processing in one State. The EU’s request to exclude privately owned Tibetan Antelopes was accepted. The amended and adopted proposal (Com. 11.5 Rev) covers: external and internal trade; other raw materials besides wool; a ban in producer and consumer countries; government responsibility in fundraising; and registration of legal stocks only. Suriname, Indonesia and South Africa expressed reservations due to references to internal trade.

TRADE IN FRESHWATER TURTLES AND TORTOISES: On Wednesday, 12 April, Germany introduced a discussion paper addressing conservation impacts of the increasing turtle trade (Doc. 11.35). A working group met throughout the week to finalize a draft resolution. The Plenary adopted a resolution on the conservation of and trade in freshwater turtles and tortoises in Asia and other regions (Com. 11.7), urging Parties to, inter alia: increase enforcement efforts with regard to existing legislation; assess current efforts to manage native freshwater populations by establishing quotas; implement research programmes to monitor the impact of trade; and increase public awareness of threats to the species. The resolution also directs the Secretariat to convene a technical workshop to establish conservation priorities for sustainable trade in freshwater turtles and tortoises.

TRADE IN SEAHORSES: On Wednesday, 12 April, the US introduced a document on seahorse trade (Doc. 11.36). A working group was established to discuss the issue and the Animals Committee met on Thursday, 13 April, to present a draft resolution directing the Secretariat to assist in obtaining funds to support a technical workshop on seahorse conservation. On Wednesday, 19 April, the Plenary adopted a resolution on the conservation of seahorses (Com. 11.8), requiring Parties to provide all relevant information concerning the status of the species; encouraging scientific research to promote long-term conservation and sustainable use; and convening a technical workshop. It also directs the Animals Committee to prepare a discussion paper on the biological and trade status of seahorses and other members of the Syngnathidae family for COP-12.

TRADE IN HARD CORAL: On Wednesday, 12 April, the UK presented a previous working group’s results on identification and reporting requirements for trade in hard coral (Doc. 11.37). He noted consensus on: ways to report trade in specimens of hard coral; the importance of defining and recognizing coral; and reporting to generic versus species level. The Secretariat proposed the creation of a working group chaired by the UK and said it was premature to wave reporting requirements. On Thursday, 13 April, the UK introduced a draft resolution allowing a lower threshold for including gravel, which excludes sand. The resolution establishes ecosystem impact criteria for import and export of rocks and identifies coral at species level for trade purposes and at genus level for taxonomy purposes. On Wednesday, 19 April, delegates adopted a final draft resolution adding coral definitions (Com. 11.9). The resolution also calls for improving guidelines for coral species recognition in trade and highlights collaboration with exporting countries.

TIMBER SPECIES: Delegates considered Secretariat recommendations on whether to repeal or maintain 14 COP-10 decisions on timber species (Doc 11.38.1). The decisions state that, inter alia, Parties should determine whether national standards organizations have already developed vernacular nomenclatures for timber species, and the potential for silvicultural techniques will be investigated to determine whether they provide bases for trade regimes. Delegates accepted all proposals except for the recommendation to repeal decision 10.52 requiring submission of species’ names to importers and CITES’ enforcement agencies.

BIGLEAF MAHOGANY: On Wednesday, 12 April, BRAZIL introduced a proposal on Bigleaf Mahogany (Doc. 11.38.2) and NICARAGUA suggested creating a working group associated with the Plants Committee, for which the US offered funding. On Thursday, 13 April, the US introduced TORs for a Mahogany working group, providing for, inter alia: reviewing of Appendix III species listing effectiveness; assessing information management; and studying measures to widen the scope of Appendix III listings. COLOMBIA and ECUADOR called for Research & Development on forest resources. The NETHERLANDS suggested the working group consider Appendix II. On Wednesday, 19 April, the US introduced revised TORs (Com. 11.8), providing additionally for an analysis of legal and illegal trade issues. The working group will report its findings at COP-12. The resolution was adopted.

STANDARD NOMENCLATURE: Nomenclature Committee Chair Hoogmoed suggested nomenclature changes in Doc. 11.4.2 and Doc. 11.39 (Com. 11.30). The document was adopted.

ASSISTANCE TO SCIENTIFIC AUTHORITIES: A document on assistance to Scientific Authorities for making non-detriment findings was introduced (Doc. 11.40), encouraging the Secretariat and Parties to develop and support workshops designed to improve CITES implementation by Scientific Authorities and to develop a manual for making non-detriment findings. El Salvador noted the importance of convening Scientific Authority regional meetings. Vanuatu highlighted the need to include Pacific Island countries in the workshops. Delegates supported the initiative and it was adopted in Plenary.

SIGNIFICANT TRADE IN APPENDIX II SPECIES: Implementation of Resolution 8.9: On Wednesday, 12 April, the Secretariat introduced in Committee I the information document on implementation of resolution 8.9 on trade in wild-caught animal species (Doc. 11.41.1). The Russian Federation submitted a draft resolution on Thursday, 13 April, stating that starting 1 January 2001, States should keep and submit records of trade of sturgeon. On Wednesday, 19 April, a revised resolution (Com. 11.4), resulting from an informal working group, was presented. The US suggested specifying Eurasian Sea basins. The Russian Federation stressed that decisions should apply to all sturgeon populations. The Secretariat noted disagreement and a vote was held on the US amendment. Delegates rejected the amendment and the US and Canada registered their objection to the entire document. During Plenary, the US re-opened the debate, requesting the resolution reflect that Parties failing to report will be issued a zero quota. With this and other amendments, the resolution was adopted. The resolution directs range States to establish annual export quotas of sturgeon and report on progress implementing resolution 10.12.

Revision of Resolution 8.9: The Secretariat introduced a draft resolution in Committee II amending resolution 8.9 on trade in wild-caught animal species and establishing a process for the Animals Committee to review biological and trade information on Appendix II species to identify problems in trade regulation (Doc. 11.41.2) and extending the process to the Plants Committee. Delegates adopted the resolution, which directs the Plants and Animals Committees to review biological, trade and other relevant information to identify problems impeding implementation of Article IV.

APPENDIX II SUBJECT TO ANNUAL EXPORT QUOTAS: Delegates reviewed the use of export quotas granted to Ecuador and Tanzania for certain Appendix II species and recorded in the annual reports submitted by the Management Authorities (Doc. 11.42). The Secretariat said the source and type of exports were not adequately reflected. Delegates noted the document.

AMENDMENT OF RESOLUTION 5.10: South Africa introduced its draft resolution amending resolution 5.10 on the definition of "primarily commercial purposes" (Doc. 11.43), noting it wished to withdraw the resolution’s operative sections, but retain preambular language referring to commercial purposes of imports. Canada, supported by the EU and the US, opposed the preambular language, saying it made the term "commercial purposes" more imprecise. The resolution was withdrawn.

BUSHMEAT: The UK introduced a discussion paper and draft decision (Doc. 11.44) to establish an on-going working group to explore the trade and wildlife management issues associated with bushmeat. In support, the Congo said bushmeat consumption has moved from traditional subsistence to commercial trade, causing population decline. The decision, which directs the Secretariat to convene a working group to consider issues related to the bushmeat trade, was adopted.

AMENDMENT OF RESOLUTION 9.6: Concerning Diagnostic Samples: Switzerland presented a proposal jointly submitted with Germany and the UK to amend resolution 9.6 concerning samples for research, taxonomic and biomedical research, in order to conform to domestic or international law requirements for the transboundary shipment of diagnostic samples for conservation (Doc. 11.45.1). The EU and others emphasized the need to eliminate bureaucracies impeding expeditious transfers of diagnostic specimens, particularly in emergencies. The Secretariat said its inability to facilitate such requests expeditiously is putting CITES into disrepute. Several delegations and observers objected, citing, inter alia, contravention of CITES and CBD provisions on access to genetic resources, and the difficulty to regulate use. Delegates adopted an informally negotiated proposal deferring the work to the Animals Committee during the intersessional period, and providing a TOR for the Committee (Com. 11.31 (Rev. 1)).

Cosmetic Products Containing Caviar: Germany introduced a joint proposal with Switzerland, and supported by the EU, to amend resolution 9.6 in order to eliminate re-exportation permits for final cosmetic products that contain "less than 0.05 gm of caviar of sturgeon species included in Appendix II per kg of cosmetic product" (Doc. 11.45.2). The proposal was rejected by a roll-call vote.

MOVEMENT OF LIVE ANIMALS: The Secretariat reported a lack of consensus in the Standing Committee on COP-10 instructions to establish a simplified procedure for cross-border movement of live animals (Doc. 11.46). He drew attention to Annex I containing a US draft of a certificate continuation sheet that could prove useful to Parties. The Committee noted the document.

REVISION OF RESOLUTIONS ON RANCHING: Delegates discussed the revision of COP-10 resolutions on ranching and trade in ranched specimens (Doc. 11.47 (Rev.1)). The document defines the term "ranching" as rearing in a controlled environment of specimens taken from the wild. The resolution recommends, inter alia, that populations of species included in Appendix I that occur within a Party’s jurisdiction, and are deemed no longer endangered by the COP, to be included in Appendix II; and that any proposal transferring a population to Appendix II in order to conduct a ranching programme must satisfy certain criteria. It also recommends that annual reports on all relevant aspects of each approved ranching operation be submitted to the Secretariat. Following several minor amendments, the resolution was adopted.

REGISTRATION OF OPERATIONS IN BREEDING SPECIMENS ON APPENDIX I: In presenting the proposed guidelines for procedures to register and monitor breeding operations of Appendix-I listed animal species for commercial purposes (Doc. 11.48), Animals Committee Chair Jenkins reported polarized views in the Committee on resolution 8.15. Delegates adopted the proposal amended by a drafting committee, after incorporating: provisions for breeders to assure the exercise is carried out in a "humane (non-cruel) manner" and to describe the facilities housing current and expected captive stock; new instructions to the Secretariat dealing with species in Appendix I; and additional guidelines for registering and monitoring breeding operations (Com. 11.27).

ANIMAL HYBRIDS: Animals Committee Chair Jenkins introduced, and delegates adopted, an amendment clarifying the terms "recent lineage" contained in resolution 10.17 on animal hybrids (Doc. 11.49). The term is to be understood to mean the previous four generations of a hybrid animal’s lineage.

USE OF MICROCHIPS: On Saturday, 15 April, the Secretariat introduced a draft resolution, incorporating proposals made by the Czech Republic, on the use of coded-microchip implants for marking live animals in trade (Doc. 11.50). On Tuesday, 18 April, the Secretariat presented a revised draft resolution from the informal working group. The EU proposed substantive revisions and the Czech Republic withdrew its counter proposal. The adopted resolution recommends, inter alia, that Parties: use implantable transponders with permanently unique codes for live animal identification; implant microchip transponders if consistent with the well-being of the specimens; direct the Animals Committee to monitor developments in microchip-implant technology; and consult regularly with the International Standards Organization (ISO) Central Secretariat.

TAGGING SYSTEM FOR CROCODILE SKINS: The Secretariat described broad consultations conducted to clarify and consolidate resolutions 9.22 and 6.17 on tagging systems for crocodile skin identification that resulted in a revised resolution (Doc. 11.51). The resolution recommending Parties to maintain a universal tagging system using ISO country coding was adopted.

MOVEMENT OF SAMPLE CROCODILIAN SKINS: The US presented its draft decision (Doc. 11.52) streamlining the export or re-export permits issuance procedure and stressed that exemptions were not being sought. She said a draft resolution would be prepared for COP-12. The EU suggested broadening the decision’s scope. IUCN noted the purpose was to ease the regulatory system. The Secretariat noted that budgetary implications were not included. Committee II Chair Koester requested that interested participants work on language for a final decision, which was adopted at a subsequent session. The decision directs the Secretariat to review methods to streamline administrative procedures and to prepare a COP-12 proposal on relevant resolution amendment.

LABELING SYSTEM FOR STURGEON SPECIMENS (CAVIAR): On Monday, 17 April, delegates discussed a draft resolution on a universal labeling system for sturgeon specimens identification (Doc. 11.53). The EU, supported by the US and Germany, suggested forming a working group to amend the document. Switzerland supported a marking system for exported caviar, whereas the Russian Federation and Iran preferred a uniform labeling system for both exporting and re-exporting countries. On Tuesday, 18 April, delegates adopted a consensus document (Com. 11.29), outlining that, inter alia: any amount of exported or re-exported caviar in excess of 250g should be marked; a non-reusable packaging label should include the grade of the caviar and a unique serial number for the shipment; and Parties should establish a system of registration or licensing for importers and exporters. Due to the Secretariat’s lack of expertise and resources, a directive to develop molecular markers was deferred to the Animals Committee.

TRANSPORT OF LIVE ANIMALS: The Secretariat noted a lack of feedback from Parties on the implementation of resolution 10.21 and its incorporation in national legislation, and requiring Parties importing live animals to maintain records of live specimen casualties per shipment (Doc. 11.54). He suggested the lack of information would compel COP-12 to amend or repeal the resolution. The EU, the US and Costa Rica supported upholding and enforcing the resolution. Germany suggested the export country attach the questionnaire to the export document and provide data on casualties of illegal shipments. Australia suggested the absence of records might signify an absence of mortality. Delegates agreed to maintain the resolution pending re-assessment at COP-12.

DEFINITION OF THE TERM "PREPARED": Kenya introduced a draft resolution (Doc. 11.55) defining "prepared" to apply from capture to shipment of a species and recommends that Parties ensure the adequate treatment of animals during the entire preparation process in order to minimize the risk of injury, damage to health or cruel treatment. Israel and Zimbabwe supported the proposal, but requested further clarification of "prepared." Switzerland, South Africa, Japan and Canada opposed. The US opposed and suggested the Animals Committee’s transport working group prepare guidelines taking into account Kenya’s resolution for consideration at COP-12. KENYA withdrew its resolution in favor of the US proposal. The issue will be re-visited at COP-12.

TRADE IN TRADITIONAL MEDICINES: The Secretariat introduced its draft decision (Doc. 11.56) aiming to simplify the implementation of resolution 10.19. In support, Canada suggested that a list of species traded for medicinal properties should include "their parts." With this and other minor amendments, the decision was adopted. The decision directs the Secretariat to, inter alia, evaluate Appendix II artificial propagation levels for medicinal purposes; continue to develop lists of plants and animals traded for medicinal purposes; and develop projects to assist Parties in implementing cites regulations on traditional medicine.

INFORMATION MANAGEMENT STRATEGY: The Secretariat introduced, and delegates approved, CITES’ information management strategy (IMS) (Doc. 11.57). The Secretariat noted the Convention’s website is the core source for information dissemination to Parties and the public. The site contains CITES-related information, including texts, resolutions and decisions, and has links with other sites, such as TRAFFIC, Interpol, WCO and others. IMS activities include: further development of the CITES World Wide Web site, a study of Internet connectivity in Africa, and a study of various initiatives to improve telecommunications in Africa. Liberia and Sierra Leone stressed the need for equipment assistance.

POTENTIAL RISK OF WILDLIFE TRADE TO THE TOURISM INDUSTRY: On Thursday, 13 April, Kenya introduced its proposal recommending minimizing impacts of tourism (Doc. 11.58). He stressed the high economic returns activities, such as tourism, compared to those deriving from products from dead animals. A majority of the delegates opposed the resolution and others concurred with the Secretariat on the lack of evidence to support a relationship between experimental trade and increased poaching, and that with appropriate domestic legislation on trade, tourism should not be threatened. On Wednesday, 19 April, Kenya withdrew its proposal due to lack of consensus.


Delegates in Committee I considered 62 proposals to amend Appendices I and II. The following is a summary of the Plants Committee's proposals, which are clustered (Doc. 11.59.1), proposals concerning export quotas (Doc. 11.59.2) and other proposals for individual species (Doc. 11.59.3).

PLANTS COMMITTEE PROPOSALS: Inclusion in Appendix II: Delegates decided to postpone a proposal on Harpagophytum procumbens (Devil’s Claw) (Prop. 11.60) until COP-12 to allow range States to collect additional data. The Secretariat introduced an additional document (Com. 11.11) requiring range and importing States to submit all available information concerning the trade, management and biological status of the species. The document was adopted.

Delegates adopted an amended proposal on dried specimens of Adonis vernalis (False Hellebore) (Prop 11.61), which emphasizes the need to designate all parts and derivatives, instead seeds and pollen, and to accept chemical derivatives and finished pharmaceutical products. Delegates also adopted proposals to include Panax ginseng (Asian Ginseng) (Prop 11.54) and Cistanche deserticola (Desert-living Cistanche) (Prop. 11.59).

Deletion from Appendix II: The Plants Committee explained that species proposed for deletion from Appendix II are not internationally traded or artificially propagated for trade. Delegates adopted proposals for deletion of: Ceropegia spp (Lantern Flower) (Prop. 11.1); Frerea indica (Prop. 11.2); Byblis spp (Rainbow Plant) (Prop. 11.3); Cephalotus follicularis (Albany Pitcher Plant) (Prop. 11.6); Lewisia cotyledon (Heckner’s Lewisia) (Prop. 11.10); Darlingtonia californica (Californian Pitcher Plant) (Prop. 11.11); and Kalmia cuneata (White Wicky) (Prop. 11.57).

Uplisting to Appendix I: Delegates adopted proposals to uplist Araucaria araucana (Argentinean Monkey Puzzle Tree) (Prop. 11.55), and Guaiacum sanctum (Lignum Vitae) (Prop. 11.62). Delegates adopted an additional decision (Com. 11.25) noting the Plants Committee will review Guaiacum sanctum and assess its status in the wild and in trade.

Downlisting to Appendix II: Delegates adopted a proposal to downlist Dudleya traskiae (Laguna Beach Liveforever) (Prop. 11.7), but decided to maintain Sclerocactus mariposensis (Lloyd’s Mariposa Cactus) (Prop. 11.5) in Appendix I. Delegates voted in favor of downlisting Disocactus macdougalli (MacDougall’s Cactus) (Prop. 11.4), but agreed the Plants Committee should conduct additional research on the species.

Annotations: Delegates adopted a proposal changing the current listings of Cyatheaceae and Dicksoniaceae (Tree Ferns) (Prop. 11. 8). Delegates also adopted a proposal to harmonize exemptions related to medicinal products by combining a current annotation for Podophyllum hexandrum and Rauvolfia serpentina (Himalayan May-apple) with an annotation for Taxus wallichiana (Prop. 11.53). Chile withdrew a proposal on Echinopsis spp, Eulychnia and other Bolivian Cactaceae used in the fabrication of rainsticks (Prop 11.56) and suggested instead amending resolution 9.18 to include a paragraph on rainsticks. Delegates adopted the new decision. The Secretariat introduced, and delegates adopted, a proposal on Echinopsis spp. (Com. 11.15) recommending Parties to harmonize their national legislation related to personal exemptions.

PROPOSALS BY FAUNA SPECIES: Nile Crocodile: Tanzania presented, and delegates adopted, a proposal to maintain the export quota of Tanzanian populations of Nile Crocodiles (Prop. 11.12).

Asian Pangolin: On Friday, 14 April, Nepal introduced a proposal to uplist the Indian, Chinese and Malayan pangolin to Appendix I (Prop. 11.13), noting extensive harvesting for parts and massive trade. An informal redrafting group was established. On Wednesday, 19 April, the US introduced the amended proposal, which retains these species in Appendix II with a zero quota. The proposal was adopted.

Black Sea Bottlenose Dolphin: On Friday, 14 April, the US, supported by Turkey, Romania and Fiji, proposed uplisting the Black Sea Bottlenose Dolphin to Appendix I (Prop. 11.14). Some delegations, including the EU and Japan, opposed, and a drafting group was established. On Wednesday, 19 April, the US presented a draft decision (Com. 11.23) that does not uplist the species, but calls on range States and the Animals Committee to assist in evaluating the species status. It also urges Parties to prohibit export of live dolphins without evidence of proper receiving facilities from a destination-based Management Authority. The decision was adopted.

Downlisting Gray and Minke Whale Stocks: JAPAN introduced proposals to downlist from Appendix I to Appendix II (Prop. 11.15), the Southern Hemisphere stock of Minke Whale (Prop. 11.16), and Okhotsk Sea-West Pacific stock of the Minke Whale (Prop. 11.17). He remarked that none of these stocks meet the biological criteria for Appendix I listing, underscored that import controls prevent illegal trade, and emphasized that there is no evidence of illegal trade in whale products. Several delegations, including the EU, the US, New Zealand, the Czech Republic, Australia, Monaco, Slovakia, Vanuatu and Fiji, expressed their support for IWC’s primacy, and opposed downlisting any species subject to the IWC moratorium. Many of the same delegations acknowledged the IWC efforts to establish an appropriate management regime, but stressed that no such scheme exists yet. The IWC said a management scheme must be developed before commercial whaling can resume. Norway said Parties are paralyzing a CITES position on whaling by taking refuge in the IWC. Iceland, Antigua and Barbuda, Cuba, Mongolia, Suriname, Bangladesh, and Saint Vincent and the Grenadines supported the proposals, with some citing concerns over food security. The International Fund for Animal Welfare said regulation of whale products in consumer countries is very poor, and cited examples of endangered whale species products in consumer markets.

Eastern North Pacific Gray Whale: Regarding the Gray Whale, the US cautioned that the Western stock is endangered, and that downlisting the Eastern North Pacific stock would result in a split-listing and further endanger the Western stock. The IWC cited recent data implying illegal Gray Whale meat in markets. Japan requested a secret ballot vote and the proposal was rejected.

Southern Hemisphere Minke Whale: Japan amended this proposal to reserve trade to Parties maintaining an appropriate DNA procedure. Australia said the proposal failed to establish separate population estimates for the two species detected by the IWC Scientific Committee. Delegates rejected the proposal by a secret ballot vote. Suriname proposed an amendment to Japan’s proposal to transfer the stock to Appendix II and maintain a zero quota until COP-12, assuming that the IWC will have taken a decision on its revised management system by then, and will have set a quota that could be applicable to CITES. Suriname requested a secret ballot vote and the proposal was rejected.

Okhotsk Sea-West Pacific Minke Whale: Japan amended its proposal to limit trade to Parties that have DNA identification methods. The proposal was rejected by secret ballot.

Northeast Atlantic and North Atlantic Central Minke Whale: Norway introduced its proposal to downlist the Northeast Atlantic and the North Atlantic Central stocks of Minke Whale (Prop. 11.18). Norway highlighted domestic monitoring mechanisms, including DNA testing. He called for an ecosystem approach to conservation, which incorporates human needs. Iceland, Japan and Cuba supported the proposal, stressing that these species are not endangered. The EU opposed, noting it is premature to state that DNA tracking techniques are approved. The US opposed, cautioning against permitting trade without adequate monitoring. Greenpeace International said allowing any trade would encourage illicit trade. Delegates rejected the proposal with a secret ballot vote.

In Plenary on Thursday, 20 April, Norway called to reopen the debate on the Minke Whale and, supported by Japan and Iceland, amended its initial proposal to limit trade to products from animals taken within national jurisdiction with countries where DNA-based identification systems for trade control are implemented. The US and others opposed, noting that downlisting this species would signal the resumption of commercial whaling. The proposal was rejected.

Brown Hyena: Switzerland introduced a proposal to remove the Brown Hyena from Appendix II (Prop. 11.19), noting no trade impacts on the species had been recorded. Delegates adopted the proposal.

African Elephant: Cameroon, speaking for a Friends of the Chair group, announced a compromise whereby ivory trade will be prohibited until COP-12 and the African Elephant populations for Botswana, Namibia, Zimbabwe and South Africa remain listed on Appendix II.

South Africa introduced its proposal to transfer its elephant population to Appendix II (Prop. 11.20). He amended his proposal to a zero quota for ivory trade. The proposal was adopted, as amended, and provides for trade in hides and leather goods and in hunting trophies and for non-commercial purposes. Botswana withdrew its proposal to maintain its African Elephant population on Appendix II to allow for an annual trade quota of 12 tonnes of ivory (Prop. 11.21). Namibia withdrew its proposal on its elephant population (Prop. 11.22), noting that proper management, law enforcement and involvement of local communities, rather than trade prohibition, would deter poaching. Zimbabwe also withdrew its proposal for an annual ivory trade quota of 10 tonnes (Prop. 11.23). He supported the use of elephant products rather than killing for ivory, declared that conservation would come through legalization and called for an efficient monitoring system. Kenya and India withdrew their joint proposal (Prop. 11.24) to list all African Elephant populations in Appendix I.

The US noted an emerging consensus among range States on elephant security and stated that ivory trade would be perilous without an efficient monitoring system. Many delegations, including the EU, Swaziland, Tanzania and Sierra Leone, welcomed the consensus to withdraw the proposals.

Dugong: Australia introduced a proposal to uplist the Australian Dugong population to Appendix I (Prop. 11.26), eliminating the split-listing of the species. Switzerland and Japan opposed, citing little evidence of illegal trade. The US, Vanuatu, Indonesia, Madagascar, Israel, the United Arab Emirates, Eritrea, Monaco, the Czech Republic and the International Wildlife Coalition supported the proposal, which was adopted.

Vicuña: Bolivia withdrew its proposal to downlist Appendix I populations of Vicuña (Prop. 11.27), noting that live shearing ensures sustainable use of the specimen. He introduced, and delegates adopted, another proposal eliminating the zero quota applicable to Appendix II Vicuña species (Prop. 11.28).

Musk Deer: The US presented, as an alternative to its joint proposal with India and Nepal to uplist the Musk Deer (Prop. 11.29), a draft decision and resolution (Com. 11.12, 13) providing for, inter alia, trade monitoring by the Standing and Animals Committees, Parties’ efforts to reduce trade, alternatives to musk and financial assistance to range States. The decision and resolution were adopted.

Urial: Germany introduced a proposal to list the Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Pakistan Urial subspecies on Appendix I and the Iran, Afghanistan, and Kazakhstan subspecies on Appendix II (Prop. 11.30). Uzbekistan noted some subspecies are already listed in Appendix II under different taxonomic appellations. The proposal was adopted with these amendments.

Darwin's Rhea: Argentina introduced, and delegates adopted, a proposal to uplist its population of Darwin's Rhea to Appendix I (Prop. 11.31).

Gyrfalcon: The US proposed downlisting its Gyrfalcon population to Appendix II (Prop. 11.32). Several delegations supported the proposal, but others opposed, indicating possible enforcement problems, genetic pollution of other populations, and opposition to creating a split listing. The proposal was rejected.

Horned and Uvea Parakeets: France, on behalf of New Caledonia, proposed uplisting the illegally traded Horned Parakeet (Prop. 11.33) and Uvea Parakeet (Prop. 11.34) to Appendix I. The proposals were adopted.

Melodious Laughing Thrush: China introduced its proposal to list this species in Appendix II (Prop. 11.35). The US, Malaysia and others supported. The EU and Japan opposed, preferring placement in Appendix III. The proposal was adopted.

Asian Box Turtles: Germany and the US introduced a proposal to include four Box Turtle species in Appendix II. (Prop. 11.36). The proposal was adopted.

Spotted Turtle: The US outlined its proposal to include the Spotted Turtle in Appendix II (Prop. 11.37), citing the negative impact of international trade specifically for pet collecting. The EU and Switzerland opposed, indicating that domestic, rather than international, trade impacted the species. The proposal was rejected by vote.

African Spurred Tortoise: France, recalling the Precautionary Principle, presented its proposal to uplist this tortoise (Prop. 11.38). Sudan, Togo, Benin and Ghana rejected the proposal. France amended the proposal to an Appendix II listing with a zero quota for wild species and the proposal was adopted.

Pancake Tortoise: Kenya outlined its revised proposal, co-sponsored by the US, requesting an Appendix II listing with a zero quota for wild species (Prop. 11.39). Tanzania opposed, noting that trade in wild species is already banned. Kenya withdrew the proposal and agreed to work with Tanzania to ensure wild species conservation.

Hawksbill Turtle: Cuba withdrew a proposal to downlist this species allowing for an initial export to Japan of its existing stockpile and an annual quota of 500 specimens thereafter (Prop. 11.40). She instead urged Parties to support a proposal allowing for a one-off sale with Japan (Prop. 11.41). She said specimens found in Cuban waters do not warrant listing in Appendix I and noted Cuba's national management programme to prevent illegal trade. Japan noted it had made a reservation on the Appendix I listing of the Hawksbill Turtle, upon joining CITES 20 years ago. The Dominican Republic, Guinea, Honduras, Namibia, Mongolia, Benin, Zimbabwe, Vanuatu, Jamaica, and Antigua and Barbuda supported the proposal. The EU, Brazil, Kenya, the Bahamas, the US and Canada opposed the downlisting, with many citing the threat of illegal trade and the risk incumbent with downlisting the whole population in Appendix II, especially when migratory habits render its management difficult. Delegates rejected the proposal.

In Plenary on Thursday, 20 April, Cuba reopened debate on its proposals with an amendment stating that trade would not take place until the control systems in Japan had been reviewed by the CITES Standing Committee. Costa Rica opposed, noting that the turtle is a migratory species and that a one-off sale could encourage other countries to stockpile shells. The proposal was narrowly defeated by secret ballot.

Reptiles and Amphibians: Germany and the US withdrew their respective proposals on the Quince Monitor Lizard (Prop. 11.43) and the Timber Rattlesnake (Prop. 11.44). Delegates adopted proposals to delete the Sonoran Green Toad from Appendix II (Prop. 11.45) and to include the frog genus in Appendix II (Prop. 11. 46).

Whale Shark: The US amended its proposal on Whale Sharks to add the Great White and Basking Sharks for listing in Appendix II (Prop. 11. 47). He highlighted over-exploitation and IUCN’s characterization of the species as "rare," and said this proposal could complement the FAO Plan of Action on the species. The Czech Republic, Monaco, the Philippines, El Salvador, the EU and TRAFFIC supported, while Indonesia opposed, highlighting food security and species identification concerns. Australia noted DNA techniques would guide identification. Several others opposed, with most noting a lack of evidence of threats resulting from commercial exploitation and the absence of trade, as well as the exclusive competence of the FAO. The proposal was rejected.

Great White Shark: Australia introduced its proposal to list this species on Appendix I (Prop. 11.48), and amended the proposal for an Appendix II listing. Kenya, the EU and New Zealand supported the proposal, while Panama, Japan and Singapore opposed. The proposal was rejected by a secret ballot.

Basking Shark: The UK proposed including this species in Appendix II (Prop. 11.49) to ensure its sustainable use. He highlighted DNA testing available for identifying Basking Shark products. The proposal was rejected by secret ballot. In Plenary on Thursday, 20 April, the UK reopened debate on the proposal, suggesting a 12-month implementation delay to enable the identification and distribution of material. He added that the UK had developed methodology for DNA testing for differentiation of sharks from other similar species. The US, Brazil and IUCN supported the proposal. Objecting, Norway said CITES lacks the competence or rules to expand its tasks in this area, which belongs to the FAO. The proposal was rejected by a secret ballot.

Coelacanths: Germany introduced, and delegates adopted, a proposal to list all coelacanths species in Appendix I (Prop. 11.50). Indonesia withdrew its proposal to list coelacanths subspecies (Prop. 11.51), noting it would be redundant.

Eastern Hemisphere Tarantulas: Sri Lanka proposed an Appendix II listing for the Eastern Hemisphere Tarantulas (Prop. 11.52), noting the species has been subjected to unsustainable collection for international trade, primarily to Europe. The US regretted that only consuming countries opposed the proposal, which was rejected.


On Thursday, 20 April, COP-11 Chair Asadi convened the final Plenary meeting and delegates finalized work on the Minke Whale (Prop. 11.18), Hawksbill Turtle (Prop. 11.41), and the Basking Shark (Prop. 11.49). On the date and venue of COP-12 (Doc. 11.60), Chair Asadi noted the next COP would take place in the later part of 2002. Chile offered to host COP-12 in Santiago.

In closing remarks, Nigeria called for the Secretariat’s support for wildlife management and in carrying out a census in their national parks and, on behalf of the G-77, solicited global assistance toward sustainable development. The EU expressed satisfaction at the outcome of the African Elephant issue, noted it would support MIKE implementation and stressing the importance of the Precautionary Principle. The Born Free Foundation, on behalf of the 60 participants of the Species Survival Network, noted CITES had gained accountability by minimizing trade impacts on wildlife and adopting important conservation decisions. Kenya thanked participants and invited everyone to discover Kenya’s parks and culture. CITES Deputy Secretary-General Jim Armstrong thanked the Rapporteurs, interpreters and the UNON staff. UNEP Executive Director Klaus Töpfer noted COPs are "a means to an end," said the adoption of the Strategic Plan cannot be over-emphasized, and welcomed synergies with other Conventions. He thanked journalists for stimulating global interest in CITES and underscored the role of civil society. CITES Secretary-General Willem Wijnstekers declared COP-11 was a success, said the outcome of the elephant issue was a victory for the whole of Africa, and expressed concern over implementation of the Strategic Plan in view of budget reductions. Chair Asadi said he had entered COP-11 as an amateur and leaves as an interested beginner. He thanked the CITES Secretariat, delegations, NGOs, bureau members, Committee Chairs, and gaveled the meeting to an end at 1:00 pm.


CITES COP-11 faced a loaded agenda, with over 40 resolutions and 62 proposals to amend the appendices. While opinions on the success of COP-11 varied according to country-specific interests, most delegates trumpeted the compromise reached on elephants and the ivory trade as the largest success of the meeting. While many also championed the failure of proposals to allow for trade in some populations of Gray and Minke Whales and the Hawksbill Turtle, others were let down by the rejection of these proposals, and left COP-11 lamenting that CITES is not maintaining an evenhanded balance between conservation and trade.


A common grievance at COP-11 was that CITES has forgotten its original calling as a conservation instrument, and is evolving into a trade instrument. One delegate referred to CITES as the "WTO of the environment." Some contend that this is a result of the sudden rise in CITES’ membership over the last ten years, adding to the diversity of interests among CITES Parties. Others point to a lack of willingness to curb consumer markets for endangered species.

Much of the divide between the trade and conservation camps can be attributed to philosophical differences, with pro-traders supporting "sustainable use" and pro-conservationists invoking the Precautionary Principle. The former assert that when biological conditions for trade in endangered species are met, and such use can be monitored and controlled, trade should be allowed; if not, CITES deviates from its mandate and loses legitimacy. While there is wide agreement that, in principle, this is true, many find the concept of "sustainable use" ambiguous and difficult to translate on the ground. Monitoring systems would play a critical role in implementing sustainable use, but many contest that such systems are far from fool-proof and don't account for the impact of other factors, such as limited scientific knowledge of species and uncertainty of the impact of environmental effects such as climate change.

Generally, there is agreement that CITES must apply the Precautionary Principle, but some stress a need to clarify its application. Consumptive users questioned the need and feasibility of providing infallible evidence before allowing commercial exploitation of a listed species. The debate between sustainable use and precaution is only expected to escalate in an increasingly trade-centered society, unless evidence demonstrates that the greatest user value in a specific species lies in non-consumptive use.


An element that complicated the negotiations at CITES was the politics of science. Delegates repeatedly called for decision-making that is science-based, not emotion-based. However, a lack of conclusive data, inaccurate reporting, and uncertainty within science itself complicates decision-making on issues by allowing leeway for self-serving interpretations or what one delegate referred to as "shockingly bad science." For example, in the debates on whether to downlist the Minke and Gray Whales to allow for commercial fishing, the pro-whaling camp was quick to announce that illegal trade can be effectively monitored through state-of-the-art DNA identification technology. Opponents stressed that this state-of-the-art technology has many unresolved flaws, such as the inability to distinguish between populations of a species.

Similarly, disputes on the impact of the one-off ivory trade arose due to conclusions drawn by the Secretariat based on reports from only eight elephant range States. Delegates from countries that assert poaching increased as a result of the one-off trade were dismayed by the Secretariat's assessment that this does not appear to be ecologically significant. For many, this led to criticism of the Secretariat's passive approach to obtaining accurate data as well as the Secretariat's role in providing an opinion.


In the debate on CITES’ relationship with the IWC, some delegates showed impatience for what they perceived as CITES’ hiding behind the IWC's moratorium on commercial whaling and suggested severing the tight relationship between the two organizations. Supporters of the IWC's primacy expressed frustration that the main critics of the IWC’s ineffectiveness are also the culprits paralyzing completion of its management system.

For some, developing synergy with the FAO is the more desirable route, with many also preferring to defer other marine species, such as sharks and the touchy topic of species introduced from the sea, to the FAO. However, unlike the IWC and CITES, the FAO’s implementation of its plan of action is voluntary.

The relationship between CITES and the CBD was scrutinized in the context of diagnostic samples of species. The proposal to eliminate permit requirements for cell culture, serum and diagnostic samples for scientific purposes was perceived as a back-door attempt to access genetic resources. However, some concede that the CBD’s provisions are not effective, and having the discussion within CITES may yield better results.


Perhaps the most important challenge facing CITES is effective implementation. The 20% cut in CITES' mid-term budget raises questions about the ability of the Secretariat to implement the recently adopted Strategic Plan and its many work activities, as well as to meet its obligations to a growing membership, with 15 new developing country Parties since COP-10. Some assert that the interests of developing countries were sacrificed to achieve compromise on the budget, with provisions for capacity building left contingent on availability of funds. For many, this raised concerns about the validity of placing trade sanctions on countries whose requests for assistance to build capacity are not effectively met, with some speculating that such action could compel Parties to opt out of CITES. At COP-11, the logic of such sanctions was brought into question by the suggestion that sanctions be placed on India to encourage enforcement of tiger conservation. From the Indian perspective, such a strike against them is counterintuitive when its real need is capacity building for patrolling poaching. As one delegate questioned, how is an untrained, unarmed patrol man to curb poachers toting weapons.


As issues of governance become increasingly important in multilateral fora, some of CITES standard procedures, such as participation of NGOs, the use of secret voting, and the role of the Secretariat in providing an opinion may need to evolve to improve transparency. At COP-11, Committee Chairs incorporated NGO contributions to the debate as they sought consensus, and NGOs were welcomed in working groups and drafting committees. The presence of the inflatable life-size Greenpeace whale outside the UNEP reception area, distribution of NGO materials in delegates’ mailboxes, although cleared by the Secretariat in advance, and campaign posters directed at specific Parties indicated for many that CITES fully incorporates many civil society perspectives. However, some are critical of such concessions, noting that the growing NGO participation corresponds to increased deference of crucial decisions to the Standing Committee, which is closed to observers, taking away NGOs’ watchdog role in important matters, and with it accountability and transparency in its operations. Also, some Parties contest that secret votes open a window of opportunity for delegates to coerce or buy votes, as delegates are not held accountable to their country positions. Although some concede there has been greater effort at COP-11 and the previous four COPs to find consensus than to vote, with secret ballots preferred over roll call votes, obscuring transparency and accountability on decisions taken.

On various occasions at COP-11, many delegates perceived that the Secretariat over-stepped its mandate to take positions on issues and, at times, took sides on debates. Some suggested this emanated from the challenge for the Secretariat to balance its role in providing strong leadership while still maintaining an advisory role, in light of competing interests. Many hope the Secretariat will continue to provide balanced recommendations based on sound science, without being perceived as pushing an agenda.


Delegates left COP-11 with a sense of accomplishment, although no one delegation achieved everything it had hoped for. Many decisions taken at COP-11 are far from the final story. The compromise on African Elephants is a temporary solution, providing a respite only until COP-12. With the next meeting of the IWC in a matter of weeks, debates on commercial whaling and DNA identification systems will surface again soon. Given the delicate balancing act between trade and conservation within CITES, it is doubtful that issues with such high stakes will ever be resolved in absolute terms. As one delegate summed up, "these may not be the best solutions, but they are the best compromises."


15TH GLOBAL BIODIVERSITY FORUM: SHARING THE BENEFITS FROM BIODIVERSITY. This meeting will take place from 12-14 May 2000, in Nairobi, Kenya. Workshops will be organized on linkages between biodiversity and poverty alleviation; instruments for access and benefit-sharing from genetic resources; and agricultural biodiversity and sustainable livelihoods. For more information, contact: Laurence Christen, Global Biodiversity Forum 15-Nairobi/COP-5, IUCN-The World Conservation Union, 28 Rue Mauverney, CH-1196 Gland, Switzerland; tel: +41-22-999-0001; fax: +41-22-999-0025; e-mail:; Internet: themes/gbf/index.html

CONVENTION ON BIOLOGICAL DIVERSITY: The fifth Conference of the Parties to the Convention on Biodiversity will be held from 15-26 May 2000, in Nairobi. For more information, contact: CBD Secretariat, World Trade Center, 393 St. Jacques W., Suite 300, Montreal, Quebec, H2Y 1N9, Canada; tel: +1-514-288-2220; fax: +1-514-288-6588; e-mail:; Internet: http://

TENTH MEETING OF STATES PARTIES TO UNCLOS: The tenth meeting of the Parties to the UN Convention on the Law of the Sea will convene from 22-26 May 2000, in New York. For more information, contact: UN Division for Ocean Affairs and the Law of the Sea; e-mail:; Internet: index.html

FAO Technical Consultation on the Suitability of the CITES Criteria for Listing Commercially-exploited Aquatic Species: This meeting of government representatives will be held in Rome, Italy, from 28-30 June 2000. For more information, contact: Mr. K. Cochrane, Fishery Resources Officer, Marine Resources Service (FIRM), FAO, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla; 00100 Rome, Italy; tel: +39-6-57051152; fax: +39-6-57053152; e-mail:; Internet:

INTERNATIONAL WHALING COMMISSION: The Fifty-Second Annual Meeting of the International Whaling Commission will be held from 3–6 July 2000, in Adelaide, Australia. It will be preceded by meetings of a number of Committees, Sub-committees and Working Groups. For more information, contact IWC: The Red House, 135 Station Road, Impington, Cambridge, UK, CB4 9NP; tel: +44-1223-233971; fax: +44-1223-232876; e-mail:

WTO COMMITTEE ON TRADE AND ENVIRONMENT: The World Trade Organization's Committee on Trade and Environment is scheduled to meet from 5-6 July and 24-25 October 2000, in Geneva. The meeting to be held from 5-6 July will include an information session with selected Secretariats of Multilateral Environmental Agreements. The meeting scheduled for 24-25 October will consider issues relating to market access, as well as the linkages between the multilateral environment and trade agendas. For more information, contact: Sabrina Shaw, Secretary of the CTE, WTO, 154 rue de Lausanne, CH 1211 Geneva 21, Switzerland; tel: +41-22-739-5482; e-mail:; Internet: environ/te030.htm. For schedule updates visit: wto/about/meets.htm

IIFET 2000 - microbehavior and MacroBenefits: The International Institute of Fisheries, Economics and Trade (IIFET) will hold its 2000 Conference from 10-14 July 2000, in Corvallis, Oregon, USA. IIFET 2000 will deepen understanding of market behavior, its effect on fisheries, and the consequences of public policies, from resource management to international trade. For more information, contact: Pam Garland, IIFET 2000 Conference Coordinator, PO Box 2423, Corvallis OR, 97339-2423, USA, tel: +1-541-754-9080; fax: +1-541-752-5450; e-mail:; Internet:

EUROBATS MOP-3: The Third Meeting of the Parties to the Agreement on the Conservation of Bats in Europe will convene from 24-26 July 2000, in Bristol, England. For more information, contact: Andreas Streit, EUROBATS; tel: +49-228-815-2420; fax: +49-228-815-2445; e-mail:; Internet:

CMS STANDING COMMITTEE: The Standing Committee of the Convention on Migratory Species will convene from 21-22 September 2000, in Bonn, Germany. For more information, contact: UNEP/CMS Secretariat, United Nations Premises in Bonn,  Martin-Luther-King-Str. 8, D-53175 Bonn, Germany; tel: +49-228-815 2401/ 2; fax: +49–228-815 2449; e-mail:; Internet: http://

FAO Technical Consultation on Illegal, Unreported and Unregulated Fishing: This meeting of government representatives will take place in Rome, Italy, from 2-6 October 2000. For more information, contact: Mr. D. Doulman, Senior Fishery Liaison Officer International Institutions and Liaison Service (FIPL), FAO, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla; 00100 Rome, Italy; tel: +39-6-57-051; fax: +39-6-57053152; e-mail:; Internet:

IUCN WORLD CONSERVATION CONGRESS: The Congress will be held in Amman, Jordan, from 4-11 October 2000. The theme of the Amman Congress is "ecospace," a term indicating that environmental protection at various geographical scales is a prerequisite for the social, economic, and even political security of people. It will link ecosystem conservation with the need to stem the global loss of biodiversity, and thus build on IUCN's traditional strengths in species and protected areas. For further information, contact the Congress Unit at IUCN USA Multilateral Office, 1630 Connecticut Avenue, NW, 3rd Floor, Washington DC 20009-1053; tel: +1-202-387-4826; fax:+1-202-387-4823; e-mail: or; Internet:

FIRST North American Symposium on the Linkages between Trade and Environment: This symposium, organized by the NAFTA Commission for Environmental Cooperation (CEC) will be held in Montreal, Canada, from 11-12 October 2000. For more information contact: Scott Vaughan, Commission for Environmental Cooperation, 393 St.-Jacques W., Room 200, Montreal, Quebec, H2Y 1N9 Canada; tel: +1-514-350-4302; fax: +1-514-350-4314; e-mail:; Internet:

FAO Technical Consultation on Eco-labelling of Fish and Fishery Products from Marine Capture Fisheries: This meeting of government representatives will be held in Rome, Italy, from 17-20 October 2000. For more information, contact: Mr. R. Willmann, Senior Fishery Planning Officer, Development Planning Service (FIPP), FAO, Viale delle Terme di Caracalla; 00100 Rome, Italy; tel: +39-6-57051152; fax: +39-6-57053152; e-mail:; Internet: http://

CITES COP-12: The twelfth CITES Conference of the Parties will be held in the latter half of 2002. Chile has offered to host COP-12 in Santiago.

Further information