Wider Caribbean Region Hawksbill Turtle Dialogue Meeting

Mexico City, 15-17 May, 2001

Working Groups Summary report

Topic	Comment	Responsibilities
		Parties	Sub-group of experts	CITES Secretariat
Monitoring/ gaps in information	Standardised protocol and format needed - this needs to take into account varying ability among Parties to implement any programme that is developed A small working group comprised of reps from countries with expertise in monitoring Incorporate material presented at the Mexico City Dialogue, focused on hawksbills Evaluate i)parameters critical for population dynamics; ii) quantity and quality of feeding and nesting habitats, as well as their relative importance of each; iii) population and habitat trends using universally acceptable criteria; iv) genetic diversity at nesting and foraging aggregations; v) magnitude and impacts of by-catch	Ongong monitoring with reporting on an annual basis In each country, evaluate nesting and foraging sites to identify index sites for long-term monitoring Each country's report should be done by scientists in that country Review monitoring protocol	Co-ordinate development of protocols and minimum information needs Identify gaps in information and new sites for monitoring Take into account existing information and other expertise when creating protocols Group could include Barbados, Bermuda, Costa Rica, Cuba, Mexico, Puerto Rico, USA, as well as IUCN	Lead the process and provide assistance to sub-group Finalisation of format is a possible topic for next dialogue
National /regional plans and processes	Not all countries in the region have a national plan Each country should be at same level Each country should convene national meetings to derive consensus on scientific issues Promote a CITES Resolution to call upon Parties to develop their hawksbill management plans based on guidelines obtained as a product of the Dialogue	Help each other to develop plans Governments convene but invite all sectors with pertinent technical expertise to guarantee scientific basis		Support to countries to develop political will and influence
Funding	Need a common goal and clear objectives to develop proposal as well as demonstrated regional consensus on priorities Possible sources include the US, EU Shouldn't forget in kind donation possibilities Make use of what already exists Fund essential expensive research (e.g. DNA analysis, satellite tracking) for region-wide common goals	Provide a list of needs and priorities to the Secretariat	Collate information on needs and priorities and develop into regional proposal	Solicit needs/priorities from the Parties (possible discussion topic for next dialogue) Present any proposal developed to potential donors Assist in the process
Information exchange	Create an internet clearing house mechanism for marine turtle information (working with a multilateral agency with experience in maintenance of information & databases) Generate directory of experts in the region	Contribute to CHM Each contribute names of experts
Trade/Use monitoring	As well as biological data also need information on harvest to implement an adaptive management, keeping in mind the needs of local communities. Generate map (GIS) of region indicating location of information on take, trade and other relevant data (legal/illegal) Request TRAFFIC's assistance on development of a region-wide trade study Identify actual consumption levels and analyze the implicated socio-economic factors	Undertake information collection Consider national licence system to help monitoring Prepare resolution for COP 12 Consider support for a monitoring system like ETIS	Help develop protocols for collection	Work with TRAFFIC to monitor illegal trade Adopt existing data collection matrices to collect new information Assist with resolution development Future dialogues should include reports on harvest in each range state
Management policies	Policies exist at various levels; specific policy/guidelines already exist for a number of management issues eg. Beach lighting management. Need to know more about HB status and harvest before we can assess existing management policies to ID 'best practice" Should maximise existing Regional policies/ MEAs as a means to encourage countries to participate in HB conservation Use relevant information (e.g. satellite tracking, DNA analysis; if available) to identify individual populations, base management on biologically meaningful units ("stocks") instead of on geopolitical units	as much information as possible to go into a CHM provide data for a regional overview		provide more time for in-depth country presentations at next dialogue assist with implementing an overview of policy in the region should explore funding for translation of available information to all parties can make use of it discussion on threats and mitigation practices should be included in next dialogue
MEAs	not the mandate of this group

<< hawksbill home  |  top of this page  |  next document >>