Summary Records, CITES Animals Committee, 14th Meeting, 1998

SUMMARY RECORDS

14th Meeting of the Animals Committee

CARACAS, VENEZUELA

25 to 29 May 1998


 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Agenda item 1
Opening Address and Welcome to Delegates ... 2
Agenda item 2

Adoption of Provisional Agenda and Working Programme ... 2
Agenda item 3
Admission of Observers... 2, 5
Agenda item 4
Adoption of Summary Record of the 13th Meeting of the Animals Committee ... 2
Agenda item 5
Adoption of the Rules of Procedure for the Animals Committee ... 3
Agenda item 6
Implementation of Resolution Conf. 10.21 on Transport of Live Animals ... 17
Agenda item 7
Review Progress on the Implementation of Resolution Conf. 9.17

on the Status of International Trade in Shark Species ... 5, 13
Agenda item 8
Implementation of Decision 10.78 on Universal Tagging

System for the Identification of Crocodilian Skins ... 3
Agenda item 9
Implementation of Decision 10.77, Regarding Specimens of

Animal Species Bred in Captivity ... 14, 22
Agenda item 10
Implementation of Decisions 10.75 and 10.76 regarding Trade in Alien Species ... 6
Agenda item 11
Implementation of Decision 10.82 on Trade in Animal Species Used in Traditional Medicines ... 20
Agenda item 12
Development of Uniform Marking System for Specimens of Sturgeons ... 14
Agenda item 13
Ranching and Trade in Ranched Specimens - Resolution Conf. 10.18 ... 5
Agenda item 14
Review of Significant Trade in Species of Animals Included in CITES Appendix II (Implementation of Resolution Conf. 8.9) ... 7, 8, 15, 24
Agenda item 15
Review of the Use of Coded-microchip Implants for Marking Live Animals in Trade and Implementation of Resolution Conf. 8.13 ... 19
Agenda item 16
Regular Review of Animals Taxa Included in the Appendices - Resolution Conf. 9.24 ... 21
Agenda item 17
Conservation and Use of Lampropeltis spp. in Central America ... 21
Agenda item 18
Regional Management of Marine Turtles ...(Withdrawn)
Agenda item 19
Conservation and Management of Collocalia spp ...17
Agenda item 20
Guidelines for Scientific Authorities - Resolution Conf. 10.3 ... 3
Agenda item 21
Guidelines for Trophy Hunting Quotas Involving Appendix-I Species ... (Withdrawn)
Agenda item 22
Other Business ... 24, 25
Agenda item 23
Date and Venue of Next Meeting ... 26

 
Annex 1
- Working Group - Review of Significant Trade in Species of Animals Included

in CITES Appendix II ... 29

- Working Group - Issues Relating to Specimens Bred in Captivity ... 33
Annex 2a
Membership Working Group on Captive Breeding ... 35
Annex 2b
Membership Working Group on Marking (live animals) ... 37
Annex 2c
Membership Working Group on Transport ... 39
Annex 3
Actions Arising from AC14 ... 41
Annex 4
Speech of Minister of Environment of Venezuela ...45
Annex 5
List of Participants ... 47

CONVENTION ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE IN ENDANGERED SPECIES
OF WILD FAUNA AND FLORA
____________
 
Fourteenth Meeting of the CITES Animals Committee
Caracas (Venezuela), 25 to 29 May 1998

SUMMARY RECORDS

Members

 

 

 

 

Africa:

Dr K. Howell (United Rep. of Tanzania)

 

 

Dr J. Ngog Nje (Cameroon

 

 

 

 

Asia:

Dr C.-H. Giam (Singapore)

 

 

Mr T. Soehartono (Indonesia)

 

 

 

 

Central and South America

 

 

and the Caribbean

Lic. O. Lara (Guatemala)

 

 

Licda. M. Quero de Peña (Venezuela)

 

 

 

 

Europe:

Dr M. Hoogmoed (The Netherlands)

 

 

Dr K. Rodics (Hungary)

 

 

 

 

North America:

Dr S. Lieberman (United States of America),

 

 

Vice-Chair

 

 

 

 

Oceania:

Dr R. W. Jenkins (Australia), Chairman

 

 

 

 

 

 

Alternates

 

 

 

 

Africa:

Mr E. Chidziya (Zimbabwe)

 

 

 

 

Central and South America

 

 

and the Caribbean

Mr S. Inchaústegui (Dominican Republic)

 

 

 

 

Europe

Dr T. Tew (United Kingdom)

 

 

 

 

North America

Dr C. Dauphiné (Canada)

 

 

 

 

Oceania:

Mr R. Hay (New Zealand)

 

 

 

Secretariat

 

 

 

 

 

Dr J. Armstrong

 

 

Mr J. Barzdo

 

 

Mr J. Kundaeli

 

 

Dr O. Menghi

Rapporteurs

 

 

 

 

 

Mr R. Gabel

 

 

Mr T. Kaveney

 

 

Ms A. Littlewood


First Session: Monday 25 May 1998, 10h00-12h00

1. Welcome (Agenda item 1)

The meeting was opened with a speech by the Chairman who expressed thanks on behalf of all participants in the meeting to the Minister of MARNR for hosting the meeting and for the arrangements made by PROFAUNA.

The Minister, Rafael Martínez Monro, welcomed all participants. His speech is at Annex 4 to this summary report.

2. Closed Session of the Animals Committee

(Refer to separate summary)

Second Session: Monday 25 May 1998, 14h00-16h45

3. Adoption of Agenda and Working Programme (Agenda item 2)

The Chairman advised that, following discussions in the closed session the Provisional Agenda had been revised taking into account that agenda item 18 (Regional Management of Marine Turtles) and 21 (Guidelines for Trophy Hunting Quotas Involving Appendix-I Species) had been deleted. The Working Programme was revised accordingly to accommodate the new order of business.

The Chairman called for items for consideration under Other Business. The inclusion of the following items was put forward and accepted.

• Interpretation of the term "recent lineage" when referring to hybrids (proposed by Canada)

• Import of in vitro cell cultures (proposed by Dr Marinus Hoogmoed, regional representative for Europe on behalf of Switzerland)

• Introduction from the sea, Doc. AC.14.22 (proposed by the Chairman on behalf of Australia)

The revised provisional agenda and working programme, with the foregoing items included under "Other Business" were adopted.

4. Admission of Observers (Agenda item 3)

As the relevant papers were not available, the Chairman advised that this matter would be dealt with later in the session.

5. Adoption of Summary Records of 13th meeting of the Animals Committee (Agenda item 4)

The Chairman stated that there was little point in maintaining this item as a standing agenda item because that agreed Summary Record was circulated to the Parties and participants in the meeting of the Animals Committee.

The observer from Zimbabwe pointed out that at both the 12th meeting and 13th meetings of the Committee he had requested that a plain language guide to the implementation of Resolution Conf. 8.9 be made available and that this matter had not been reported in the Summary Record. The Secretariat advised that it intended to produce a draft guide for the next meeting of the Animals Committee. The observer from Zimbabwe requested that other organizations, such as IUCN, be involved in the preparation of the draft. The Committee agreed noting that Committee members would be consulted in the preparation of the draft guide.

There was also a discussion of the involvement of regional representatives, and the need for regional representatives to consult with countries in their region. It was agreed by the Committee that regional representatives consult countries in their region before putting matter on the AC agenda.

There was also discussion of the utility of further discussing the Conf. 8.9/significant trade process. The regional representative for North America recommended an evening forum discussion at the next meeting of the Animals Committee, to discuss significant trade and the making of non-detriment findings by scientific authorities. The Committee agreed to hold such a forum, and recommended that a Notification be sent by the Secretariat prior to the meeting inviting papers and discussion items on these issues.

6. Adoption of the Rules of Procedure (Agenda item 5)

The Chairman advised that the Committee had agreed to adopt the Rules of Procedure adopted by the Standing Committee at its 40th meeting, in March 1998 (Doc. AC14.5 Annex 4). The Chairman advised that the Rules of Procedure of the Conference of the Parties would apply in relation to seating arrangements and interventions by observers.

{NOTE: the Rules of Procedure were discussed in closed session where it was agreed that a uniform set of procedures should apply for both Animals Committee and Plants Committee}

Action: Secretariat to review the rules of procedure for Standing Committee and Plants Committee and develop draft standards for the next AC meeting.

7. Guidelines for Scientific Authorities (Agenda item 20)

The Secretariat introduced document Doc. AC.14.20 and added that three additional countries, Cambodia, Saudi Arabia and Myanmar, had not designated Scientific Authorities and should be added to those countries listed in paragraph 5.

There was extensive debate on the interpretation of the term "independent" as used in Resolution Conf. 10.3 in paragraph a) under Recommendations. The observer from New Zealand drew attention to the limited capacity of smaller nations (particularly possible future Parties among small island States) to establish separate Scientific and Management Authorities. There was consensus that the person(s) issuing permits should not be the same as the person(s) deciding on non-detriment, and that there must be independent decision-making. The observer from IUCN outlined the current activities being undertaken to develop capacity building workshops including field operations. They had consulted the Secretariat. It was agreed that IUCN should report on progress at the next meeting of the Animals Committee.

It was agreed that the text presented by the observer from the European Commission provided useful guidance regarding the independence of a Scientific Authority, namely: "the designated Scientific Authority shall have appropriate qualifications and their duties shall be separate from those of the designated Management Authority".

Action: IUCN to report to the 15th meeting of the Committee on progress with capacity building workshops for Scientific Authorities.

8. Implementation of Decision 10.78 on Universal Tagging System for the Identification of Crocodilian Skins (Agenda item8)

The Chairman referred participants to document Doc. AC.14.8 and stated that this document represented an effort to complete the implementation of a practical crocodile tagging system. He stated that the document had been developed with the input of several Parties and the IUCN/SSC Crocodile Specialist Group.

The observer from the United States of America recommended a change to the wording in the operative part of Resolution Conf. 9.22 cited on page 4 so that it should read "...legitimately taken skins are tagged in accordance with the requirements of the issuing Management Authority." The basis for this proposed change was that in the United States of America skins were not presented to the Management Authority until the time of export. The observer from Germany expressed support for the recommendations in document Doc. AC.14.8 with the alternative wording and stated that the Parties should not forget the provisions of Resolution Conf. 6.17 in the implementation of crocodile tagging. The observer from Zimbabwe urged caution in adoption of the change proposed by the observer from the United States of America because the original wording had been derived from the experiences of the Parties and had the purpose of ensuring that quotas were not exceeded. He also noted that this would not pertain to the United States of America because their exports were not subject to quotas established by the Conference of the Parties.

Regarding paragraph b) of Resolution Conf. 9.22, Ms Mirna Quero de Peña (regional representative for Central and South America and the Caribbean) stated an objection to the requirement to have tags marked with the year of export. She stated that it would be more practical to have the tags marked with the year of harvest, because specimens might not be exported in the year of harvest. The Chairman noted that quotas for caiman in Venezuela were developed by the Management Authority in consultation with the Scientific Authority and, because paragraph b) only applies to Appendix-I species, it does not apply to caiman skins exported from Venezuela. The representative of North America suggested that the text reflect the differing political structures of the Parties (for example, the federal system in the United States of America where harvest is managed by states, but export is regulated by the federal government). The Chairman advised that the term "Party" allows interpretation to obviate the need to specify responsibilities of different levels of government within a Party. The observer from Zimbabwe believed that the procedures of Resolution Conf. 6.17 applied to Appendix-II species, not to Appendix-I species. The Chairman asked the Secretariat for a clarification, and the Secretariat expressed agreement with the observer from Zimbabwe.

The observer from IWMC suggested several changes. He suggested that the preambular paragraph on page 3 of document Doc. AC.14.8 should read "...certain populations of crocodilians..." and should not refer to only Crocodylus niloticus and C. porosus. Second, at the top of page 3, under "Recommended Action", the requirement to report the size of skins exported should be deleted, because Parties do not report this information. Third, on page 4, top paragraph, regarding the issue of whether tags should be marked with year of harvest or year of export, he noted that CITES deals with export, not harvest. Finally, he suggested that perhaps instead of marking tags with either the year of harvest or year of export, the Parties could report the numbers of tags (numbers beginning and ending the annual series) used within a year. The observer from the IUCN/SSC Crocodile Specialist Group reminded participants that the existing resolutions had been very successful. Parties have adopted tagging systems that are operating well, with sufficient flexibility. He therefore favoured making only minor changes, but retaining the resolution relatively intact. The Chairman agreed.

The observer from the Born Free Foundation stated that there were software packages available for managing commodities, and that such software might be useful for administering skin-tagging programmes. He offered the assistance of the NGO community in studying the potential application of these softwares to skin-tagging programmes, including the preparation of a report for the Committee.

The observer from the National University of Costa Rica expressed the need to register producers and primary processors, but disagreed with discontinuing registration of exporters. Rather, to maintain a precautionary approach, he suggested registering producers and primary processors as well as exporters. Later perhaps the Parties could consider eliminating the registration of exporters. For now, he expressed concern about the proliferation of small entities involved in the trade and the possible loss of control if exporters were not registered. He also suggested a rewording in the proposed preambular amendment on page 3: The end of the last sentence should read, "...not detrimental to the survival of these wild populations."

The Chairman requested the observer from the IUCN Crocodile Specialist Group to co-ordinate the various contributions during the discussion and construct a revised draft resolution to take account of the recommended amendments. He asked the observer from Zimbabwe to provide suggested revisions to Resolution Conf. 9.22 in writing to the IUCN representative. He also recommended that the observer from the Born Free Foundation discuss his offer regarding software with the IUCN/SSC Crocodile Specialist Group. The revised draft resolution would be considered further by the 15th meeting of the Committee.

Action: IUCN/SSC Crocodile Specialist Group to co-ordinate proposed amendments to Doc. AC14.8 and transmit draft revision of Resolution Conf. 9.22 to the Chairman for consideration by the 15th meeting of the Committee.

9. Admission of Observers (Agenda item 3)

The Chairman referred the Committee and Party observers to document Doc. AC.14.3, which contains the list of observers. There being no objections from the representatives of Parties, all organizations listed in the document were formally admitted. A list of participants is at Annex 5.

10. Ranching and Trade in Ranched Specimens (Agenda item 13)

The Chairman referred to document Doc. AC.14.13 and noted that this issue had been referred to the Animals Committee by the Conference of the Parties because of confusion surrounding the efforts at the 10th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to repeal Resolution Conf. 5.16 (Rev). He further noted that the Secretariat, in accordance with the procedure agreed by the Conference of the Parties, had drafted Resolution Conf. 10.18 to consolidate existing resolutions related to ranching. Document Doc. AC.14.13 was designed to initiate the repeal of Resolution Conf. 5.16 (Rev.) (which contained the texts not included in the consolidation) and to further clarify the term "ranching".

The observer from Germany expressed his appreciation for the effort reflected in the document, and agreed that parts of Resolution Conf. 5.16 (Rev.) that are never used should be repealed. However, he recommended that the definition of ranching, as it appears in Resolution Conf. 10.18, should be retained as there had been no problem with this definition. The Chairman agreed that the existing definition should be retained if there was consensus as to its applicability. The observer from Zimbabwe advised that the Parties should be careful in consolidating resolutions and generalised approaches to problems. He stated that the strength of CITES had been that specific recommendations applicable to specific taxa had been developed. Dr Lieberman (regional representative for North America) also supported retention of the current definition of ranching. The Chairman acknowledged that there appeared to be consensus on keeping the current definition of ranching.

The observer from the United States of America stated that document Doc. AC.14.13 appeared to treat non-Parties preferentially to Parties and any revision should contain text to require non-Parties to comply with the recommendations of the Conference of the Parties when trading with Parties. She also recommended that the current sections on crocodilians from Resolution Conf. 8.22 be retained but made generic so that they are applicable across taxa. The Chairman agreed with the recommended changes and undertook to present a revised resolution for consideration by the Committee at its next meeting.

Action: Chairman to incorporate views of the meeting as amendments and submit a draft revision of Resolution Conf.  8.22 for consideration by the 15th meeting of the Committee.

The session was closed at 17h30.

Third Session: 26 May 1998: 09h00 - 12h00

11. Review progress on the Implementation of Resolution Conf. 9.17 on the Status of International Trade in Sharks (Agenda item 7)

The Chairman offered the floor to the observer from FAO (Venezuela). The observer advised that he had been asked by FAO headquarters to seek opinions from the Animals Committee and interested Parties, for a preparatory meeting from 22-24 July, in preparation for a meeting in Rome (26-30 October 1998) where the adoption of an Action Plan for Sharks would be considered.

Discussion of this agenda item was suspended as a number of participants had not received copies of the relevant documents.

12. Implementation of Decisions 10.75 and 10.76 Regarding Trade in Alien Species (Agenda item 10)

The Chairman described the work that had been done since the 10th meeting of the Conference of Parties as a result of Decisions 10.75 and 10.76. The decisions were directed at both the Animals and Plants Committees. The Chairman had consulted with the IUCN/SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group on issues of mutual interest, including the draft IUCN Guidelines for the Prevention of Biodiversity Loss due to Biological Invasions.

The observer from New Zealand introduced document Doc. AC.14.10. New Zealand had been a co-sponsor, with the United States of America and Argentina, of the document on this subject produced for the 10th meeting of the Conference of the Parties. The observer from New Zealand saw the decisions of the Conference as providing an opportunity for greater collaboration between CITES and the Convention on Biological Diversity, with CITES having the potential to be a vehicle whereby some of the aims of the CBD could be achieved.

The observer from New Zealand sought the Animal Committee's opinion on three matters in particular:

1. endorsement of continued liaison on this issue;

2. explanation of how a database on invasive species might be useful to Parties; and

3. input into the guidelines prepared by IUCN/SSC.

The observer from IUCN explained that the subject of invasive species had been identified as one of five priority work programmes of IUCN. A workshop earlier in the year had produced a work programme that included initially the preparation of guidelines and in later stages capacity building and training for Customs and enforcement authorities on how to deal with invasive species. IUCN would keep the Animals Committee informed about developments, in order to facilitate potential collaboration.

The Chairman noted that there was general agreement on the importance of the subject and requested the Secretariat to circulate a Notification to Parties on the subject of invasive species. It should be prepared in collaboration with the Chairman of the IUCN/SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group. The notification should include a request to Parties and regional representatives to provide information on experiences with known invasive species and to identify potential invasive species included in the appendices.

In the discussion, it was noted by several observers including the observers from Zimbabwe and the International Wildlife Coalition, that it was generally difficult to predict whether a species had the potential to become invasive. The observer from New Zealand explained that there were occasions when it could be predicted that a species would be invasive; he gave the example of deer. He was, however, in general agreement that prediction was difficult and emphasized that the aim of the paper was not to produce a `predictive model` but to encourage networking.

The observer from the Dominican Republic requested that IUCN/SSC, the Animals Committee and other technical groups should pay particular attention to small island States that face various problems, in particular the lack of legal mechanisms to cope with economic pressures arising from issues such as invasive species.

The observer from IWMC expressed concern about the relevance of CITES to invasive species. He identified Article XIV, paragraph 1, as the only provision that could valuably be used, since it provided the possibility to take stricter measures. He noted that when specimens escaped and became invasive, this was more likely to be after import than during transport.

There was extremely wide support for this topic, and an excellent discussion ensued, with supportive interventions advocating action from: Argentina, New Zealand, the United States of America, Chile, Australia, Bahamas, Guatemala, Dominican Republic and numerous NGOs. Argentina (as both an exporting and importing country) stressed the need for exporting countries to show "responsibility" and not export invasive species. Dr Lieberman (regional representative for North America) and the observer from Zimbabwe both stated that the document should be modified, and language struck that says that CITES-listed species do not tend to be invasive, as that is not the case. The Committee agreed.

The Secretariat voiced concern about a potential increase in its workload; in response, the Chairman explained that the Committee wished the Secretariat only to collate responses to the notification and send these to the IUCN/SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group. IUCN/SSC was requested to report back to the 15th meeting of the Animals Committee on progress.

Action: Secretariat to circulate a Notification requesting Parties to provide information on experiences with invasive species and to identify potential invasive species (only those species subject to international trade as live animals, with a focus on CITES-listed species). Secretariat to collate response and send to IUCN/SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group.

13. Review of Significant Trade in Species of Animals Included in CITES Appendix II (Implementation of Resolution Conf 8.9) (Agenda item 14)

The Chairman introduced this Agenda item and said that it would be a topic for discussion in a working group that would be charged with reconsidering species considered in phases 1 and 2 and identifying potential phase IV species for consideration by the Animals Committee. At its 10th meeting, the Conference of Parties had instructed the Animals Committee to consider sturgeon species in the review of significant trade and they would therefore be on the list of species to be considered in phase IV.

The observer from Zimbabwe requested that the working group also be given the task of examining the whole process of the implementation of Resolution Conf. 8.9 (i.e. the review of significant trade).

The Secretariat noted that, at the 13th meeting of the Animals Committee, it had been agreed that recommendations on hard corals would be formulated once a final report had been submitted by TRAFFIC-USA. The Secretariat said that it had not received the report, but the observer from TRAFFIC-USA stated that it had been sent late in 1997. The Chairman asked for this to be clarified after the session.

Action: Secretariat to clarify location of final report on hard corals and circulate to members of the Committee for review pursuant to the provisions of Resolution Conf 8.9.

The Secretariat introduced document Doc. AC.14.14.2 on the current status of action on species considered in phase III. It was explained that this document was an update of the report submitted by the Secretariat to the 13th meeting of the Animals Committee and to the 10th meeting of the Conference of the Parties.

Benin - Chamaeleo gracilis

Dr Hoogmoed (regional representative for Europe) stated that there had been many problems in relation to the trade in "ranched" specimens from West African countries and Switzerland had received reports which suggested that ranching operations were not sustainable, with no specimens being returned to the wild. The observer from Zimbabwe reminded the Animals Committee that the species was in Appendix II and it was up to each range State to manage its own population. The Vice-Chairwoman noted however that a non-detriment finding had to be made for specimens to be exported whether they were captive-bred, ranched or wild-caught.

It was agreed that the recommendations would not be withdrawn but that, before the Secretariat referred the matter to the Standing Committee, the African representative should pass the Committee's concerns to Benin and seek clarification.

Action: In order to obtain a regional perspective of management, the Secretariat should write to the Management Authority of Benin requesting the information that is presently available on the distribution and abundance of Chamaeleogracilis in Benin as the basis for managing the species. [Refer to sections on Ghana and Togo].

Canada -Monodon monoceros

The observer from Canada explained that his country was having some difficulties with surveying its narwhal populations and that consultation with Greenland and Denmark was taking time. The secondary recommendations had been taken into account in the process of planning surveys. The observer from Canada confirmed that current levels of harvest were sustainable and that he would make the necessary data available to the Committee. The Vice-Chairwoman concurred with the Secretariat that the response was satisfactory.

Action: CITES Management Authority of Canada to provide the Committee with survey results that demonstrate sustainability of present harvest levels.

Côte d'Ivoire - Poicephalus gulielmi

The Secretariat had received no response from Côte d'Ivoire. It was agreed that the Secretariat should continue to seek information.

Action: Secretariat to continue its efforts to obtain the necessary information from the Management Authority of Côte d'Ivoire.

Ethiopia -Chlorocebus aethiops

The Chairman requested that the Secretariat consult Ethiopia over the possible re-emerging problems associated with the recent lifting of the ban on export of this species.

Action: Secretariat to communicate with the Management Authority of Ethiopia to ascertain export levels of this species since the export ban was lifted.

The Chairman closed the session at 12h00.

Fourth Session, 26 May 1998: 14h00 - 17h45

14. Review of Significant Trade in Species of Animals Included in Appendix II (Agenda item 14) (continued)

The Chairman opened the session with announcements and turned the meeting over to the Vice-Chairwoman for discussion of "Current Status of Actions on Phase III".

Ghana - Cercopithecus petaurista & Chamaeleo gracilis

Regarding Cercopithecus petaurista in Ghana, the Secretariat reported that this species had been dealt with at the 13th meeting of the Animals Committee. As for Chamaeleo gracilis from Ghana, the Secretariat had received a report from Ghana stating that it had reduced its exports from 2,000 to 1,500 specimens annually but these export levels were not based on survey data. The Secretariat recommended that Ghana be encouraged to conduct surveys to assess the status of the species. The Vice-Chairwoman asked whether there was agreement to accept the Secretariat's recommendation and suggested that the Secretariat continues dialogue with Ghana on this species and encourages that country to conduct surveys of this species.

The Chairman stated that Chamaeleo gracilis was very common in that part of Africa but there was a need to consider domestic use as well as international trade, in order to have a thorough understanding of trade in and use of the species. He indicated that this species was widely used as a talisman and in traditional medicine. The Vice-Chairwoman stated that it was important to get information from Ghana on the basis of their non-detriment finding. She added that, if this species is abundant, such findings should be relatively easy to make. She suggested that both the Secretariat and the African regional representative should seek additional information from Ghana. The Chairman agreed and asked that any enquiries include reference to the need for information on the use of the species domestically, for traditional medicine and other purposes, and that it should be made clear to Ghana that such uses should be considered in any assessment. The Vice-Chairwoman agreed. Dr Howell (regional representative for Africa) asked for clarification of what was to be asked of Ghana. The Vice-Chairwoman stated that they should be asked what information they have and not necessarily be asked to conduct field surveys.

Action: In order to obtain a regional perspective of management, the Secretariat to write to the Management Authority of Ghana requesting the information that is presently available on the distribution and abundance of Chamaeleo gracilis in Ghana as the basis for managing the species. [Refer to sections on Benin and Togo].

Guinea - Poicephalus gulielmi

Regarding the export of Poicephalus gulielmi from Guinea, the Secretariat reported that there was a ban on export of this species from Guinea, so no further action was required.

Mali - Geochelone sulcata

The Vice-Chairwoman asked the Secretariat to report on Geochelone sulcata from Mali. The Secretariat stated that a lengthy report had been received from Mali but this largely discussed the legal status of the species. There was no information on the biological status of the species; however, Mali had stated that they strictly controlled exploitation of the species. The Secretariat recommended that Mali be encouraged to conduct an assessment of the status of the species. The Secretariat added that, according to the data in annual reports of the Parties, from 1992 to 1994, no specimens of this species were exported from Mali, but exports amounted to more than 1,900 specimens in 1995 and more than 1,500 in 1996. In response to a question from Dr Ngog Nje, (regional representative for Africa), the Secretariat noted that there was no requirement for Parties to notify the Secretariat of quotas for Appendix-II species.

The observer from Germany noted that the species is widely distributed over the Sahel region, is heavily exploited for food, and is a species of concern to the IUCN Specialist Group. He suggested that Mali should be asked for more information on the general use of the species, not just trade. The Vice-Chairwoman concurred and stated that field surveys are needed to substantiate a scientific basis for exports.

The observer from TRAFFIC International asked whether primary or secondary recommendations or recommendations for other actions would be made regarding G. sulcata in Mali. She noted that the original request for action had been made when exports numbered 40 animals in a year whereas current levels exceeded 1,500 annually. The Chairman responded that primary and secondary recommendations were not formulated in open session in the presence of observer organizations but in closed session or by post with the involvement of the Secretariat. He noted that there had been a recommendation for regional representatives to attempt to obtain additional information on G. sulcata. The Vice-Chairwoman recommended that, before the next meeting of the Committee, input should be sought from the IUCN/SSC specialist groups, not just on this species but on others as well.

Action: The Secretariat to consult the Management Authority of Mali to ascertain the scientific basis by which exports of this species are permitted. Based on the information provided by Mali, the Committee should consider the need, or otherwise, for action under Resolution Conf 8.9. The Chairman and Secretariat to consult with IUCN/SSC specialist groups on this and other species, as appropriate.

Myanmar - Psittacula finschii

The Vice-Chairwoman asked for comments from the Secretariat on Psittacula alexandri and Psittacula finschii from Myanmar. The Secretariat reported that Myanmar had not permitted export of specimens of these species since 1990 and therefore the recommendations could be withdrawn. The observer from the International Wildlife Coalition noted that P. finschii was not always recognized as a distinct species and that, because Myanmar exported other species of Psittacula, it should be clear that these species were not being exported under other names. It was suggested that the Secretariat should contact Myanmar to clarify this. The Secretariat pointed out however that, in the print-out of data from the CITES annual report database maintained by WCMC, containing details of species for which exports exceeded 100 specimens a year, there were no records of exports of Psittacula species from Myanmar.

Solomon Islands - Tridacnidae spp & Varanus indicus

The Vice-Chairwoman asked the Secretariat to report on Tridacnidae spp. The Secretariat reported that the Philippines prohibited export of wild-collected specimens, so the previous recommendations were no longer applicable.

Regarding exports of these species from the Solomon Islands, the Secretariat stated that the competent authorities had advised the Secretariat that they were working toward standardization of export documents as well as marking procedures. The Vice-Chairwoman suggested that the recommendations of the Secretariat in Doc. AC.14.14.2 should be accepted and asked whether there was any indication from the Solomon Islands that they would be acceding to CITES soon. The Secretariat responded that there was no such indication although the Solomon Islands had complained that they felt "persecuted" for not being a Party, especially because of the ban on imports of Varanus indicus into the European Union from the Solomon Islands.

Regarding Varanus indicus from the Solomon Islands, the Secretariat reported that, according to a recent letter from the competent authorities of this country, the export quota had been reduced to 800 specimens a year, which was below the recommended quota. The observer from TRAFFIC International noted that trade from Solomon Islands in recent years exceeded 1,000 specimens a year for the period 1994-1996 and the Secretariat confirmed this. The Vice-Chairwoman advised that the Solomon Islands should be consulted about this since it appeared that annual exports exceeded the quota. The observer from the European Commission noted that they had consulted with Solomon Islands in recent months on this species as well as on psittacine species. He stated that quotas had often been exceeded and, when the numbers of wild-caught specimens in trade were reduced, there is a concomitant rise in the trade of specimens declared as captive-bred. The Vice-Chairwoman suggested that the Secretariat should consult further with the Solomon Islands and report to the Animals Committee on their findings. The observer from IWMC World Conservation Trust recalled that there had been a longstanding problem for the Secretariat in getting information from Solomon Islands, and that the report from SPREP had recommended that no export of birds should occur until a thorough review had been conducted. The observer from Germany concurred and stated that the European Union had imposed a ban on import of Varanus indicus as well as other species of reptiles and birds from Solomon Islands. He recommended that the Secretariat contact the Solomon Islands to request the basis for allowing exports. The Secretariat confirmed that it was still the policy of the Secretariat not to confirm the validity of permits from Solomon Islands. The Vice-Chairwoman suggested that there was a need to consider further primary recommendations after the Secretariat had consulted further with Solomon Islands.

Action: The Secretariat to write to the competent authority of the Solomon Islands seeking advice on the basis by which annual export levels of Varanus indicus are established and the mechanisms that have been established to ensure that established annual quotas are not exceeded. The Secretariat to also write to the Solomon Islands urging accession to the Convention. Based on the information received, the Committee should consider whether or not further action, pursuant to Resolution Conf. 8.9, is warranted.

The Secretariat should also advise the competent authority of the Solomon Islands of recent nomenclatural changes, requesting future export permits use the name Varanus spinulosus.

Togo - Chamaeleo gracilis

The Vice-Chairwoman asked the Secretariat to report on Chamaeleo gracilis in Togo. The Secretariat said that Togo had reported the existence of the species in that country but there had been no scientific assessment. However, Togo has stated that its export quotas were very prudent, although no numbers had been provided. Mr Ngog Nje (regional representative for Africa) stated that the export quota was 1,500 in 1996, but reduced to 500 for 1998, therefore indicating that the quota had been reduced and was prudent. The Secretariat noted that the reported trade in this species from Togo was as follows: 823 specimens in 1992; 354 in 1993; 330 in 1994; 494 in 1995; 1,607 in 1996. The observer from IUCN stated that the European Union had funded a study in Togo, which would include this species. The Vice-Chairwoman agreed that the export quota appeared prudent but believed that Togo should be consulted, along with other range States, to get a regional perspective on the status of the species. The Chairman stated that there was a need to look at regional trade, which was especially important. The observer from Zimbabwe noted that regional trade between States was also subject to the provisions of CITES and there was a need to determine whether this trade was being properly regulated. The Chairman concurred, adding that regional trade should be considered in the context of trade for traditional medicine. He said that the trade among local communities, where national boundaries were not always clearly marked, may not be regulated. The Vice-Chairwoman noted the importance of considering all aspects of trade.

Action: In order to obtain a regional perspective of management, the Secretariat to write to the Management Authority of Togo requesting the information that is presently available on the distribution and abundance of Chamaeleo gracilis in Togo as the basis for managing the species. [Refer to sections on Benin and Ghana].

Viet Nam - Psittacula alexandri

Regarding exports of Psittacula alexandri from Viet Nam, the Secretariat stated that there had been no response from Viet Nam, but the reported data on trade from Viet Nam was as follows: 10, 561 specimens in 1992; 1,475 in 1993; 3,625 in 1994; 3,870 in 1995; 360 in 1996. The Vice-Chairwoman stated that this issue needed to be discussed further in closed session, and that Viet Nam should be contacted to determine the reason why the export levels had dropped so substantially.

Action: Secretariat to write to the Management Authority of Viet Nam requesting advice on the reason(s) for the decline in recent years of exports of this species from Viet Nam.

Democratic Republic of the Congo - Poicephalus gulielmi

The Secretariat reported next on Poicephalus gulielmi from the Democratic Republic of the Congo. In October 1996, the Secretariat had received a response from the Management Authority stating that the species did occur in that country, that it was included in Appendix II of their own wildlife law, and export of the species was allowed. There were no survey data but there was a low quota. The Secretariat noted the need to bear in mind the recent political changes and suggested that the Management Authority be encouraged to proceed with planned surveys. The Secretariat also reported that the trade data showed a ten-fold increase in exports from 300 specimens in 1992 to over 3,000 in 1996. The Vice-Chairwoman recommended that this be taken up in closed session. She noted that the primary and secondary recommendations had not be implemented previously because of low trade but that the issue needed to be reconsidered.

Regarding the nomenclatural issues surrounding Varanus indicus, the Vice-Chairwoman stated that the Nomenclature Committee would take up this issue in their evening session. The Secretariat stated that it had issued a Notification to the Parties to inform them of the decision of the Conference of the Parties on this subject. The Secretariat was requested also to inform Solomon Islands of the decision.

The Vice-Chairwoman closed discussion of Doc. AC.14.14.2. The observer from the European Commission asked why the Committee would make further recommendations, since the purpose of this session had been to review the results of previous recommendations. The Vice-Chairwoman said that the observer was correct but that for some species there were changed conditions so as to require reconsideration. She also advised that only one or two species would be considered for further recommendations. The Chairman pointed out that in fact for a number of the species the Committee had not formulated recommendations but had agreed on "other actions".

Strombus gigas

Regarding Strombus gigas, the Secretariat stated that this species was among the first to have an established regional management plan (subsequent to the inclusion of the species in CITES Appendix-II), which had been accomplished in the Caribbean following a meeting in Puerto Rico. Drafts of primary recommendations for the species had been circulated among the Animals Committee for comment and then finalized. The final primary recommendations were sent to all range States in September 1997, with a deadline of December 1997 for responding. Not all countries had responded (summary in Doc. AC.14.14.3). The quality of responses had been variable. The Secretariat would share this information with the regional representatives for Central and South America and the Caribbean as well as the Caribbean Fisheries Management Council. The Secretariat stated that responses were needed from additional countries, particularly France and the Netherlands, especially regarding Caribbean territories such as St. Maarten, but also including Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Dominica, France, Mexico, St. Lucia and Trinidad and Tobago. They stated that some countries, notably Canada, had had problems with tourists returning from range States with shells. He reminded range States that they needed to fully implement the provisions of CITES regarding regulation of exports.

The observer from France stated that France committed itself to respond by the end of June, adding that 1997 trade figures were very low and no imports or exports had occurred in 1998.

The observer from the United States of America thanked the Secretariat for its efforts on this issue and expressed regret about the lack of notification of the meeting in San Jose, Costa Rica. She advised that the recommendations listed by the Secretariat in document Doc. AC.14.14.3 had been considered at the San Jose meeting but not adopted. However, participants had focused most closely on implementing a harvest ban from July to September. She stated that neighbouring countries had been holding sub-regional meetings but no decisions had been taken. The Chairman asked who had convened the San Jose meeting. The observer from the United States of America described the Caribbean Fisheries Management Council as one of several United States fisheries management councils, and said that the Caribbean council was a "bridge" to other Caribbean countries. The Caribbean Fisheries Management Council had organized an informal "international queen conch initiative" because action was needed in the region. A working group of this informal initiative had met in San Jose.

The observer from the Bahamas stated, with regard to the Secretariat's recommendation 4 in document Doc. AC.14.14.3, that the Bahamas did not inspect tourist luggage but was looking at potential legislation for regulating personal effects. He also noted that, because of differences in growth rates of the species across its range, lip size was considered the most reliable character for evaluating maturity of specimens. The observer from Venezuela noted that before the San Jose meeting there had been a meeting in San Andres and that other sub-regions had been working on management of the species, but some countries were lax. He asked that the Animals Committee look at those countries that were not implementing the provisions of CITES for the species.

The observer from the Dominican Republic stated that tourist shells were a by-product of the harvest of a staple food item. Therefore, the Parties needed to evaluate how to regulate trade in the shells because they were widely available and trade was difficult to control. The Secretariat stated that the Secretariat and Canada were looking to exporting countries for guidance on how to deal with tourist trade in shells.

The Chairman stated that the process of implementing Resolution Conf. 8.9 had a significant positive impact on this species and that there was much activity to achieve its management in the wider Caribbean. He noted that some countries had not provided information and that there were therefore gaps in the knowledge of the species. Therefore, he suggested that the Animals Committee should pursue action through the Standing Committee. The Animals Committee therefore endorsed the Secretariat's recommendation that countries should respond and that non-response should be brought to the attention of the Standing Committee. The Chairman recommended that the Secretariat should forge relationships with regional fisheries management councils. The observer from the United States of America agreed and noted that this species was a model for the effective use of an Appendix-II listing in the management of a fisheries product.

The observer from the European Commission asked whether, since the observer from France had responded orally and promised to provide information in writing, it could be exempt from further action by the Secretariat for the time being. The observer from Mexico also noted that they had not responded but that this did not mean that they had no regulations or that they had not implemented controls, and they promised that they would respond very quickly. The Chairman advised that the Secretariat should suspend action regarding France and Mexico if they provided the necessary information quickly. The observer from the Bahamas suggested that regional representatives should get involved in eliciting responses from their Parties that had not responded; the Committee agreed. The Secretariat asked how the Secretariat should handle Parties that were not present to respond orally. The Chairman suggested that the deadline for responding should be extended for one month, in fairness to countries not represented at the meeting. The Secretariat referred the Committee to Annex 1 of the document and stated that the Secretariat was bound by the direction from the Standing Committee, and therefore could not extend the response period. It could only advise the Standing Committee that France and Mexico had responded orally, but after the deadline, and inform them of the recommendation of the Animals Committee. The Chairman stated that the Animals Committee would recommend to the Standing Committee the approach described above for France and Mexico.

The Chairman suggested that regional representatives write to all countries that had not responded and urge them to do so. The Vice-Chairwoman noted that the Standing Committee should be consulted and that this should be done quickly.

15. Review Progress on the Implementation of Resolution Conf. 9.17 on the Status of International Trade in Shark Species (Agenda item 7)

The Chairman asked for the authors to introduce their papers relating to this agenda item. The observers from the United States of America and TRAFFIC outlined their respective papers and the Chairman introduced his report of the FAO Technical Working Group meeting that had been held in Tokyo in April 1998. In response to a request from the Chairman, the observer from WWF-US added the following comments.

There are three points that the Animals Committee should consider as recommendations on which FAO may initiate action:

a) Improve the manner in which FAO requests members to record and report data on shark catches.

b) Work with the CITES Secretariat and the World Customs Organization to improve the specificity of trade codes (e.g. products, species, product form, i.e. wet/dry, fillets, etc).

c) Encourage FAO to commit sufficient resources to finalize and publish the World Catalogue of Rajiformes - otherwise known as skates and rays or batoids.

These elements are contained in both the decisions of COP10 and the recommendations of the FAO Technical Working Group.

The observer from WWF-US also recommended that the Chairman, in his liaison with FAO, under Decisions 10.73 and 10.74, continue to offer the expertise of CITES to FAO to further ensure adequate coverage of the concerns of CITES in the Plan of Action.

The Chairman thanked the observer from WWF-US. He felt the most appropriate course of action would be for him to write to FAO to elaborate on the issues raised by WWF-US and to ask for copies of all draft documents prepared for the October meeting in advance so that relevant input could be provided by the Animals Committee. The Chairman agreed with the observer from the United States of America that this letter should be sent as soon as possible so that essential input could be provided in time for the FAO meeting in October.

Dr Hoogmoed (regional representative for Europe) then provided information from the Management Authority of Switzerland regarding controls implemented on trade in shark meat and or shark products.

The observer from the Bahamas advised that they were experiencing problems with poaching of sharks and requested that records of illegal trade in sharks be kept and made available.

There was extensive discussion, with the Committee agreeing that it is important to ensure that international shark trade and the nexus with CITES continue to be discussed in the FAO context (including illegal trade/poaching issues). The Chairman closed the discussion on this agenda item by recommending that the Secretariat notify all Parties of the forthcoming meetings and encourage Parties' Management and Scientific Authorities to collaborate with their relevant fisheries agencies on these matters.

Action: Chairman to write letter to FAO to elaborate on issues of concern to CITES and to request continued liaison and involvement in FAO deliberations on this issue.

16. Review of the Registration System - Resolution Conf. 8.15 (Agenda item 9)

The Chairman introduced document Doc. AC.14.9.1 and explained that the Animals Committee had been instructed by the Conference of the Parties to re-examine the registration process. Related to this were the issues of defining the term "bred in captivity for commercial purposes" (referred to in Article VII and Decision 10.77) and the criteria for establishing a list of species commonly bred in captivity (Resolution Conf. 10.16). The Chairman stated that a working group would consider these matters the following day. He stressed that the task of the working group was not to construct a list of species but rather it would need to determine the process by which species could be identified for inclusion on the list.

The Vice-Chairwoman, who would be chairing the working group, stressed that, should a species not be included in the list for any reason, it could still be traded as captive-bred.

The Chairman pointed out that the observer from Zimbabwe (Dr John Hutton) would chair the working group dealing with discussion of significant trade (Resolution Conf. 8.9).

17. Development of a Uniform Marking System for Specimens of Sturgeons (Agenda item 12)

It was noted that there were three documents relating to this agenda item, document Doc. AC.14.12, document Doc. AC.14.12.1 and a copy of a letter to the Chairman from the Head of the Russian Fisheries Department, Ministry of Agriculture and Food.

The observer from the Russian Federation advised the Chairman that his country had hosted a meeting to discuss the recent listing of sturgeons in the CITES appendices and that it was their intention to host a second meeting in late 1998 to further progress dialogue on this matter. The observer from the Russian Federation stated that he had been instructed to request the Animals Committee to postpone discussion of this matter until a later date. The Chairman thanked the observer from the Russian Federation for his input but advised that it was not possible to defer this item because of the instruction contained in Resolution Conf. 10.12 which recommends, in paragraph h):

"that the Secretariat, in consultation with the Animals Committee, explore the development of a uniform marking system for sturgeon parts and derivatives and aquaculture stocks to assist in subsequent identification of the species while consulting with appropriate experts in fisheries, aquaculture and industry, and particularly in collaboration with range States".

The Chairman pointed out that, of the Caspian Sea range States, only the Russian Federation was represented in the meeting despite all range States having been sent formal invitations to attend. Although the Animals Committee was required to consider this matter, it may not be possible to reach conclusive decisions at this meeting, and continued consultation with all range States would be necessary. Range State involvement, as outlined in Resolution Conf. 10.12, was essential.

The observer from TRAFFIC introduced document Doc. AC.14.12 and added, in relation to the possible use of bar codes, that this may not be possible owing to the need to have specialized equipment for this process. A self-adhesive sticker with text might be a more practical alternative.

The observer from the United States of America outlined the content of their paper (document Doc. AC.14.12.1) which included a proposal of a system for tagging fish, to complement the system that may be developed for products. This marking system would enable individual fish to be tracked in relation to the catch quota. The observer from the United States of America mentioned that they were eager to convene a working group to discuss marking and to report to the next meeting of the Animals Committee.

Dr Hoogmoed (regional representative for Europe), read a letter from the Management Authority of Switzerland drawing attention to the many problems that have to be addressed in the control of trade in sturgeon specimens. Several participants pointed out that these topics had already been discussed at the meeting in the Russian Federation.

The Chairman stated that this issue was extremely complex. He particularly compared it with the marking of crocodilians, which had been subject to lengthy discussion for over 10 years and believed that the trade in caviar was likely to be even more complex. He suggested that the Secretariat convene a working group, to further consider this issue, particularly in light of the intention of the Russian Federation to convene a meeting in late 1998. The working group should include range States and principal importing nations. The observers from Germany and the United States of America strongly supported this recommendation. The Secretariat however advised that it did not have the mandate or power to convene working groups. Consequently the Chairman recommended that Animals Committee from a working group involving the Secretariat, for the sole purpose of considering the marking issue.

Action: AC to form working group to consider marking issue. Working Group to be chaired by the USA, members to include all range states, major importing countries, TRAFFIC-International and the Secretariat.

Secretariat to provide a list of participants [including contact co-ordinates] to the USA.

The observer from the United States of America invited interested individuals, Parties, and the Secretariat to an ad hoc meeting on Thursday evening to discuss several issues pertaining to implementation of the sturgeon listing (including pre-Convention stocks and airline and cruise trade).

The session was closed at 17h45.

Fifth session: 28 May 1998: 09h00 - 12h20

18. Review of Significant Trade in Species of Animals Included in CITES Appendix II (Agenda item 14)

Trade in hard corals

The Chairman opened the session at 09h00, asking the observer from the United States of America to introduce document Doc. AC.14.14.4. After introduction of the document, the Chairman noted that recommendations dealing with coral identification and reporting on coral trade had been referred to the Conference of the Parties on the basis of agreement reached in the Animals Committee, but that controversy had developed at the 10th meeting of the Conference of the Parties over issues that had not been considered by the Committee. The US document also clarified that regional representatives to prior meetings of the Animals Committee had not consulted sufficiently with governments in their region. The Committee agreed that such consultation is vital, particularly when the Committee discusses draft resolutions to be submitted to the Conference of the Parties. Consequently, no agreement was reached at the meeting of the Conference of the Parties. The Secretariat made a plea for interim guidance on how to deal with permits, because many export permits for hard coral were referred to the Secretariat for verification but could not be verified because they did not specify the species being traded but rather the genus or a higher taxon.

Dr Hoogmoed (regional representative for Europe) stated that the wording of the document was confusing with respect to what is readily recognizable, the coral gravel and living rock or the species. The observer from the United States of America stated that coral gravel and living rock are recognizable but that the species of coral that they comprise are not necessarily identifiable. Dr Hoogmoed suggested that this was a matter to be dealt with through amendment of the appendices, not through a resolution. The observer from Germany stated that the United States of America had presented a very good document to address this problem and that it should be adopted. The Chairman suggested that the observers from Germany and the United States of America and Dr Hoogmoed should meet in order to suggest an approach to this problem.

The observer from Italy stated that her country had stopped imports of "living rocks" (according to the CITES definition of it) without permit, but the same shipments were still freely entering through other European Union Member States. She urged the adoption of uniform treatment of these shipments among countries. Dr Lieberman (regional representative for North America) urged the European Union to address the problem described by Italy. She disagreed with Dr Hoogmoed's opinion that the problems with corals should be addressed through amendment of the appendices. Rather, she recommended that, upon return to their respective countries, the observers representing Parties should present the draft resolution from the United States of America to their Management Authorities and return to the next meeting of the Animals Committee with positions on that document. She suggested that if there were agreement on the document at that meeting, it could be submitted to the 11th meeting of the Conference of the Parties for consideration.

The Secretariat stated that they still needed interim guidance on how to deal with permits referred to them for verification. The Chairman suggested that the Secretariat could use the draft resolution from the United States of America as interim guidance, and meanwhile members of the Committee should consult within their regions to ascertain the level of agreement on the United States' proposal. The Chairman noted that this approach was not intended to bypass the review of significant trade (in accordance with Resolution Conf. 8.9) as it pertains to corals. The Secretariat said it was satisfied with this approach. They noted however that the discussion had focused on Resolution Conf. 9.4 but that the problem was with Resolution Conf. 10.2. The Chairman then repeated his suggestion for the Secretariat to use document Doc. 10.65 as a basis for verifying permits until the next meeting of the Conference of the Parties.

The observer from the European Commission believed that the suggestion of the Chairman was irregular. The observer from TRAFFIC-International suggested that Resolutions Conf. 9.6 and Conf. 10.2 required amendment. This suggestion was supported by the observer from the IWMC World Conservation Trust, who further suggested that a review of trade in hard corals should include domestic uses as well as international trade. He also suggested that clarification was needed on the quotas established by Indonesia, since those quotas were difficult to track against permits. He suggested that this difficulty would be eliminated if Indonesia stopped reporting quotas to the Secretariat, since they were under no obligation to do so; this recommendation was not endorsed. The Secretariat stated that the difficulties would still exist even if there were no quotas.

The Chairman suspended further discussion on the matter suggesting that the issue be raised during the closed session that was scheduled for the next day. The Chairman then restated his recommendation that regional representatives on the Animals Committee consult the Parties within their regions. He asked that the United States of America to co-ordinate this issue and report back to the Animals Committee at its next meeting. He suggested that the comments of TRAFFIC-International should be considered in relation to proposed amendments to Resolution Conf. 10.2.

(Note: During the closed session, the matter was resolved satisfactorily after reviewing the text of Resolution Conf 10.2 and noting the provision that permitted exporting Parties to issue export permits without citing specimens to the species level provided adequate justification for doing so was provided to the Secretariat).

Action:

- Chairman to write to Standing Committee recommending that permits be accepted as issued.

- Indonesia be requested to advise the Secretariat on difficulties issuing permits to species level.

- United States to co-ordinate a further review of Resolutions Conf. 9.6 and 10.22.

- Regional representatives to inform Parties of this issue.

- Parties to review draft resolution from the United States for discussion at the 15th meeting of the Animals Committee.

19. Conservation and Management of Collocalia spp. (Agenda item 19)

The Chairman asked Dr Giam (regional representative for Asia) to introduce document Doc. AC.14.19, which was an information document on progress in addressing issues relating to the status of and trade in species of Collocalia. After the presentation of the document, the Chairman stated that this matter represented a good example of how species of concern should be handled and that it should not always be necessary to immediately amend the Appendices for a solution. The Chairman thanked Dr Giam (regional representative for Asia) and requested that he report back to the Committee in due course on the meeting of the Task Force, mentioned in the document, to be held later in 1998.

Action: Dr Giam to report on the outcome of the meeting of task force to the 15th meeting of the Committee.

20. Implementation of Resolution Conf. 10.21 on Transport of Live Animals (Agenda item 6)

Dr Lieberman, as the Chairwoman of the Transport Working Group, introduced document Doc. AC.14.6 on this subject. She asked that the Committee consider passing the chairmanship of the Transport Working Group to a representative of a Management Authority of a country other than the United States of America as she was now in charge of the United States Scientific Authority, it would be good to let another Party chair the working group. She stated that the document contained selected relevant text from Resolution Conf. 10.21, with recommendations for implementation. She suggested that the Secretariat should compile information, through a Notification of the Parties, to determine which Parties have referred to or incorporated the International Air Transport Association's Live Animals Regulations in their domestic legislation. She also recommended that the Animals Committee should look at 20 key species to address problems of mortality associated with transport of specimens of those species. She emphasized that this should be an exercise to address implementation problems, not to prohibit trade in the species. She informed the Committee that the principle of reviewing these 20 species (including mammals, birds, reptiles and amphibians) had been recommended by a group of several NGOs representing varied interests (including trade and animal welfare perspectives). She noted that she had participated in this process for many years, and it is gratifying to see the consensus work of these diverse interests on this vital issue. She suggested that the Secretariat should collect information on reasons for mortality in transport and monitor implementation of Resolution Conf. 10.21 and report their findings to the Parties.

At the request of the observer from the United Kingdom, Dr Lieberman (regional representative for North America) read the proposed list of species. She advised that species were placed on the list on the basis of trade volume, information on mortality in transport, and because of the lack of information on reasons for mortality. She acknowledged that for some species the available information was anecdotal only but suggested that high mortality occurred.

Ms Rodics (regional representative for Europe) advised that, in Eastern Europe there was no state quarantine system. Consequently the only mortality data available were from traders and these were unreliable. The observer from Germany reminded the Committee that Germany had presented a report, at the 10th meeting of the Conference of the Parties, on mortality rates of over 300,000 animals up to the point of sale to the end consumer. He said that this report was in press and would be provided to the Animals Committee. He said that the European Union now had regulations that required Member States to report transport mortality to the European Commission and that 1998 would be the first year of data collection. The observer from Germany also made a tentative offer to take over the chairmanship of the Transport Working Group, but stated that he would need to consult with his government to ensure that financial support would be available for this task.

Dr Lieberman (regional representative for North America) recommended that the Parties should not just look at mortality levels but should also seek discussion with traders. The observer from the Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council (PIJAC) suggested that the Parties should look at potential reasons for mortality at all stages of transport, from export through to the period after import. He stated that his group was photographing shipments at the time of export and import to determine where mortalities occurred and why. He further suggested that contacts with the International Air Transport Association should be done in a very sensitive and diplomatic way to avoid the perception of imposing control that might result in an embargo on live animal shipments by carriers.

Dr Ngog Nje (regional representative for Africa) suggested that, for the list of 20 species, the Parties should not just investigate causes of mortality but determine which exporting countries might have a particular problem with mortality in their shipments. He also suggested that pre-export factors, such as trapping methods, should be studied to assess their potential to influence mortality during transport. Dr Howell (regional representative for Africa) believed that the efforts by PIJAC to photograph shipments should be made known, since this might encourage shippers to improve procedures. Dr Lieberman (regional representative for North America) explained that the study of trapping methods was an internal matter for Parties to address. The observer from the European Commission stated that there was no provision to publish the data they were collecting but they would share their information with the Animals Committee.

The observer from El Salvador said that humane transport was important but that the Parties should avoid imposing procedures that would impose unnecessary costs on traders. The observer from PIJAC agreed and urged participants to make this a co-operative effort, since specimens used in the live animal trade but that died in transport benefited no one. He also urged that the capabilities of developing as well as developed countries be considered in the development of standards, and stated that reptiles should receive the most immediate attention. Dr Giam (regional representative for Asia) suggested that, for the 20 species, the Committee should look at: which countries were involved in the mortality; who shipped the animals; increases or decreases in mortality over time; causes of mortality; and other factors. He also stated that he had a report to share on mortality. He suggested that the Parties should seek comments from the Commonwealth Veterinary Association and the World Veterinary Association on the CITES guidelines. He suggested that it was important to determine whether mortality in transport was caused by one shipper or concerned shipments from one country, or whether it was widespread. He suggested that lists be compiled of individuals and countries, not just species, associated with high mortality of animals being shipped.

The Chairman agreed with the idea of obtaining comments from veterinary associations and with the need to determine whether high mortality was limited to shipments from certain individuals or countries. Mr Soehartono (regional representative for Asia) recommended that mortality rates for the 20 species be provided as ranges, with standard deviations, which would suggested whether mortality of a species was consistently high or variable, perhaps inflated by one or two incidents of high mortality. Dr Lieberman (regional representative for North America) stated that the mortality rates given were not for one shipment and were not proffered as a basis for halting trade but rather for improving compliance. The observer from the International Wildlife Coalition agreed that the Parties should pay attention to notorious violators. He added that it would be difficult to draw general conclusions about factors contributing to mortality if any review was not designed to consider species across shipments. He further advised that concentrating on individuals or countries might hamper co-operation in compiling information. Dr Lieberman advised that information would be circulated by the end of the day with suggestions on how to proceed.

Membership of Working Group is contained in Annex 2C.

Action: Secretariat should collect information on reasons for mortality in transport and monitor implementation of resolution Conf 10.21 and report findings to Parties.

Secretariat to send Notification requesting Parties to provide information on whether IATA Regulations have been referred to in domestic legislation relating to the transport of live animals.

Chairmanship of working group to pass to Germany (yet to be confirmed).

21. Review of the Use of Coded-microchip Implants for Marking Live Animals in Trade (Agenda item 15)

The Secretariat introduced document Doc. AC.14.15, noting that they received many requests for advice on the marking of specimens. He said that consensus was needed on the application of Resolution Conf. 8.13.

The observer from Electronic Identification Devices Ltd. (EID) circulated different models of microchips and noted the differences among them, pointing out the two ISO standards represented by each and the fact that one allowed for smaller microchips whereas the other resulted in substantially larger microchips. He stated that the size of the microchip was important because there was less intramuscular or subcutaneous migration of the smaller chips. He noted that the IUCN/SSC Conservation Breeding Specialist Group had recommended that the Conference of the Parties consider the use of microchips for identifying live animals in trade. The observer also noted that the ISO standards were in the public domain and therefore were not protected, and that there was no requirement to have a unique code on each microchip. Most importantly, he noted that microchips could now be re-programmed. He therefore urged the Animals Committee to encourage the development of unique coding, with transponder technology that could be legally protected to ensure unique coding, and that companies providing microchips for live animal identification should be required to demonstrate that they have legal protections on their coding technology.

The Chairman said, "technology has become its own worst enemy"; microchips had been considered a great boon to animal identification but were now nearly useless for CITES purposes if re-programmable. He also noted that monitoring the development of this technology had consumed a great deal of the Secretariat's time, and that the Secretariat should not be required to continue this monitoring. He recommended that Resolution Conf. 8.13 be repealed and replaced with a resolution reflecting a more practical approach to technology for marking. In response to a question from Mr Soehartono (regional representative for Asia), the Chairman stated that the Parties would not be selecting one provider of microchips. Dr Giam (regional representative for Asia) agreed that Resolution Conf. 8.13 should be repealed but noted that microchips were used for marking specimens of Scleropages formosus in Singapore.

The observer from the Bahamas asked for clarification as to whether there was any secure system or company providing microchips, and was told there was none. The observer from the Czech Republic suggested that Resolution Conf. 8.13 be revised in the first operative paragraph as follows:

"... adopt the use of implantable transponders bearing permanent, unalterable and unduplicable codes for the secure identification of live animals...".

He recommended that the remainder of the resolution be retained. He also stated that microchips had high value as a marking technology and that the Animals Committee should encourage the development of unique coding systems.

The observer from Argentina stated that Resolution Conf. 8.13 should not be repealed. She noted that no system of marking was completely secure and that the problems that had been identified should not preclude the use of microchips altogether. She recommended that countries adopt a uniform system to ensure compatibility of the technology among countries. She also suggested that the Animals Committee, rather than the Secretariat, should be charged with tracking the development of marking technology. The observer from Germany agreed that Resolution Conf. 8.13 should not be repealed but improved. He noted that some Parties had implemented this resolution. He suggested that new developments in the technology should be considered in revising the resolution and that the Parties should consider in what cases the technology might be most useful.

The observer from the British Falconers Club opposed the use of microchips for falcons as inappropriate. The observer from the IWMC World Conservation Trust stated that marking was an important aspect of the control of wildlife trade and recommended that Resolution Conf. 8.13 should be revised on the basis of consideration of all aspects of the issue. The observer from the Czech Republic disagreed with the observer from the British Falconers Club and stated that more failures of the technology are caused by human error than by the technology itself.

Dr Lieberman (regional representative for North America) suggested that a revision of Resolution Conf. 8.13 should involve a review of technical improvements in the identification of animals, including an evaluation of genetic marking and identification techniques. She suggested that the Secretariat should advise the Parties of the most recently available technology. She further suggested that this would involve only information collection by the Secretariat, not assessment of the technology.

Dr Quero de Peña (regional representative for Central and South America and the Caribbean) recommended that any revision of Resolution Conf. 8.13 should be based on consideration of the costs of implementing recommendations contained therein. She believed that the Parties should not impose requirements for the use of technology that might be unavailable or expensive to implement in some areas. The observer from the Bahamas noted that Resolution Conf. 8.13 allows for the use of methods of marking other than microchips and does not require the use of any particular marking method. He also noted that the resolution instructs the Animals Committee to monitor technological developments and advise the Secretariat, so this should not be a burden on the Secretariat.

Ms Rodics (regional representative for Europe) stated that in Hungary microchips were being used and the cost was borne by the owner of the animal, and was not prohibitive in any case. The observers from Colombia and Venezuela suggested that this technology be recommended for application to higher-valued animals only, since for some species the technology may exceed the value of the animals. The observer from Venezuela also asked that consideration be given to the need for training in the use of new technologies. The observer from Mexico concurred with the observers from Argentina and Germany and stated that Mexico used microchips to mark confiscated specimens to identify them as the property of the State. The observer from the European Commission advised that the requirements for use of microchips in the European Union were more for internal purposes, but that CITES requirements for marking were limited. The observer from the International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies noted that his organization's members had marked millions of animals and had a great deal of experience to contribute. He noted particularly that the Parties needed to consider the impact of marking on wildlife because significant mortality had resulted from the marking of animals. The observer from Argentina suggested that a revision of Resolution Conf. 8.13 should recommend that the Animals Committee collect information on the experience of the Parties and interested organizations in marking of animals.

The Chairman agreed with interventions that a draft resolution to revise and replace Resolution Conf. 8.13 should be submitted to the next meeting of the Conference of the Parties. He noted that any revision should ensure that Parties using certain technology should not penalize other Parties that do not have that technology, and that the Parties should also be mindful of the comments by the observers from Colombia and Venezuela regarding costs. The Chairman appointed a working group to draft a revision of Resolution Conf. 8.13, which should incorporate the discussions at this meeting. The members of the group are the Czech Republic (Convener), France, Mexico, the United States of America, Venezuela, the British Falconers Club, the International Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies and ZOOCONSULT.

Action: Working group to produce a draft revision of Resolution Conf 8.13 for next meeting of COP. Working group be chaired by Czech Republic. Membership of working group is outlined in Annex 2B.

The Chairman closed the session at 12h20.

Sixth Session: 28 May 1998: 14h00 - 17h10

22. Implementation of Decision 10.82 on Trade in Animal Species Used in Traditional Medicine (Agenda item 11)

Dr Lieberman (regional representative for North America) introduced document Doc. AC 14.11, which provides the background to this item. She noted that COP 10 had directed the Animals Committee to develop a list of species utilised in traditional medicines, to assist the Parties in focusing conservation attention on those species, and to determine the status and effectiveness of CITES implementation for those species (under Conf. 8.9). She recommended that a working group of the Animals Committee be established to fulfil these responsibilities.

The observer from TRAFFIC-USA introduced document Doc. AC 14.11.1, which was divided into two parts. The first concerned regional TRAFFIC activities relating to traditional medicines, and the second part concerned factors to be considered in relation to traditional medicine.

The observer from the Japanese Wildlife Research Centre informed the meeting that, as far as he was aware, Japan had stopped importing musk in the late 1980s.

Dr Choo-Hoo Giam (regional representative for Asia) stated his opposition to the establishment of a working group, or even to the development of a list of species used in traditional medicines, claiming that some people could use such a group or such a list to oppose traditional Asian medicine. He did suggest that the issue could be re-assigned to a workshop on enforcement, targeting problem species such as the tiger and bears.

Dr. Ngog Nje (regional representative for Africa) pointed out that trade shifts from one species to another and this was the reason why the Animals Committee had been asked to look at all species. The observer from Zimbabwe stated that in his opinion the process for identifying species used in traditional medicines could be achieved by the implementation of Resolution Conf. 8.9 (the review of significant trade). He went on to say that unrecorded, cross-border regional trade was a problem that should be addressed.

Consensus for a working group to be established to identify all species used in traditional medicine was not achieved, but it was felt that Parties should be encouraged to supply available trade data to the Secretariat.

Action: Secretariat to send Notification to all Parties requesting that they supply all available trade data on all known species used in traditional medicines.

23. Conservation and Use of Lampropeltis spp. in Central America (Agenda item 17)

Lic. Oscar Lara (regional representative for Central and South America and the Caribbean) introduced document Doc. AC.14.17. There was general agreement that the species was not the subject of any real conservation concerns and was not suitable for inclusion in Appendix II at this time.

24. Regular Review of Animal Taxa included in the Appendices (Agenda item 16)

Dr Hoogmoed (regional representative for Europe) introduced the relevant documents, which included document Doc  AC.14.16.1 on criteria for amendment of Appendices I and II and document Doc. AC.14.16.2, being a letter from the Swiss Scientific Authority.

The Chairman announced that Dr Hoogmoed would chair the discussion of this Agenda item.

Dr Hoogmoed said that a review of all species would be an extremely time consuming and labour-intensive process, which would require a degree of prioritization if it was to be achieved. Document Doc. AC.14.16.1 suggested a possible means of approaching this task.

The observer from the European Commission reminded the Committee that Resolution Conf. 9.24 placed responsibility for the review with range States and proponents in conjunction with the Animals Committee. A way forward would be to consult with range States and proponents to establish which species might require review. The observer from IWC suggested that a systematic approach to review species in a chronological order of listing might be appropriate. The Chairman sought clarification from the Secretariat on whether Resolution Conf. 9.24 took precedence over a Decision taken at the 10th meeting of the Conference of the Parties. The Secretariat said that, in their view, Resolution Conf. 9.24 took precedence. The observer from Germany suggested that experts should be consulted prior to circulating lists of species to proponents and range States, taking into consideration the conservation status of the species.

Dr Lieberman (regional representative for North America) agreed that it would be preferable to consult with the Parties on which species they would deem it useful to see evaluated pursuant to Decision 10.71 and Resolution Conf. 9.24. The Committee agreed that the review should be narrow and focused. Interveners disagreed with the recommendations in document Doc. AC.14.6.1, since these would lead to an elaborate review process that would be timely and costly. It was agreed to send a Notification to the Parties, highlighting Resolutions Conf. 9.24, Conf. 9.1 (Rev.) and Decision 10.71; the Parties would be asked which taxa should be reviewed, with a focus on the views of range States. Taxon specialist groups would be consulted as part of the review.

Dr Hoogmoed (regional representative for Europe) concluded that the Animals Committee would consult with IUCN/SSC for preparation of a list of priority species and a Notification would be sent to the Parties requesting their input on species to focus on.

25. Other Business (Agenda item 22)

The observer from Canada requested clarification from the Committee of the term "recent lineage" in relation to hybrids. The Secretariat recalled that, in discussions on this subject at the 10th meeting of the Conference of the Parties, the delegation of Australia had suggested that this term be interpreted to mean the last four generations of the lineage. There had been no opposition to this at the time. There was general agreement by the Committee that this interpretation provided a useful guideline. The Secretariat said that it would notify all Parties of this interpretation and ask Parties to inform them of any problems encountered in applying it.

Action: Secretariat to notify Parties that the term "recent lineage" should be interpreted as meaning the last four generations. Secretariat will also ask Parties to inform them of any problems they encounter with implementation of this definition.

The Chairman introduced document Doc. AC.14.22 on Interpretation and Implementation of Articles IV (6) and IV (7) (Introduction from the Sea). The Chairman recommended that the Animals Committee could establish a working group comprising Australia, Japan and the United States of America, to examine this complex matter in more detail and report back to the next meeting of the Committee. The Secretariat stated that, in their view, as the Conference of the Parties had not discussed this subject, it was outside the terms of reference of the Committee to discuss it. They believed it should be referred to the Secretariat, which could refer it to the Standing Committee. The Chairman consequently amended his proposal, saying that the matter could be pursued by the three Parties as an initiative to be progressed independent of the work of the Animals Committee. The working group would then determine whether or not it would report back to the Committee at its next meeting. The observers from these Parties expressed their willingness to form a working group according to the approach suggested by the Chairman. The observer from Argentina suggested that the Secretariat should also participate on the working group.

Action: Australia, United States of America and Japan to discuss this matter between them and determine an appropriate response.

The Chairman closed the session at 17h10.

Seventh Session: Friday 29 May 1998, 09h00-12h00

The Chairman opened the session at 09h00 and announced that there would be a brief meeting of the working group on microchips during the first coffee break.

Reports of the Ad-hoc Working Groups

26. Implementation of Decision 10.77, Regarding Specimens of Animal Species Bred in Captivity (Working Group I) (Agenda item 9)

The Vice-Chairwoman, who had chaired the meeting of the working group on specimens bred in captivity, presented the minutes of that meeting (Annex 1).

Dr Hoogmoed (regional representative for Europe), recommended that the procedure for submitting proposals to the Standing Committee to add species to the list of species commonly bred in captivity [Resolution Conf. 10.16, paragraph b)ii)C)2.a)] should be modified. He suggested that proposals should not be submitted through regional representatives or the Animals Committee to the Secretariat, since the resolution states that the proposals are to be submitted to the Standing Committee by the Animals Committee.

The observer from the United Kingdom asked whether the agreed procedures would require each Party to register all of its breeding operations for Appendix-I species. The Vice-Chairwoman answered that, based on the consensus of the working group, a facility would have to be registered only if the Management Authority was issuing permits under the exemption of Article VII, paragraph 4, for that facility. Facilities not exporting specimens would of course not come under the provisions of the Convention.

The Secretariat suggested that when proposals for the registration of large-scale operations are circulated among the Parties for comment, they should be translated into the working languages of CITES and circulated to the regional representatives. The observer from the Bahamas supported this suggestion.

The observer from the United States of America stated that the definition of "bred in captivity for commercial purposes" was agreed by the Working Group by consensus and was consistent with Resolution Conf. 5.10, and she requested that this be reflected in the minutes.

Mr Soehartono (regional representative for Asia) asked, if an operation were classified as a "small-scale producer", and was therefore not subject to extensive review by the Parties, what would happen if it was found that the operation was engaging in illegal activities. He also asked what would happen if these small-scale producers increased their production, and whether the Animals Committee should review all proposals to register operations. The Chairman stated that these were matters for the working group to consider and stressed that whatever procedures were developed should be streamlined and practical.

The observer from Germany expressed concern about the workload that might result from a two-tiered system requiring different procedures for small- and large-scale producers. He suggested that simply sending a copy of a permit (issued under Article VII, paragraph 4) to the Secretariat should serve as a request for inclusion of a small-scale operation in the Secretariat's database. The Vice-Chairwoman noted that the working group (Particularly range countries) had felt strongly that registration of all facilities is vital to the implementation and enforcement of the Convention, while also agreeing by consensus that expedited registration of small-scale producers was appropriate.

Dr Ngog Nje (regional representative for Africa) suggested that, with reference to Resolution Conf. 8.15, Annex 1, the Parties should pay attention to the role of captive breeding in conservation and that the focus of discussions had been more directed to economic benefits. He suggested that an evaluation of a facility, including any outside the range States of the species, should take account of the contributions it is making to the conservation of the species. He also stated that the names and addresses of non-range State registered facilities must continue to be made available to range States. The Chairman concurred with the suggestion to consider conservation benefits of the breeding operation in the evaluation of proposals. The observer from Chile also agreed that the conservation benefits of captive breeding should be considered, and agreed with suggestions to streamline the registration process, but he disagreed with the idea of eliminating registration of breeding operations. He particularly emphasized the need to be able to determine sources of specimens and that a register or database of breeding operations would serve as one source of such information. He emphatically stated that the focus should be on conservation of species, and control of illegal trade, and not on economic benefits.

The observer from the European Commission recognized the relationship between captive breeding and conservation, and that this should be explored, but expressed the belief that these issues are outside the purview of CITES. He agreed with the working group's definition of "bred in captivity for commercial purposes" but disagreed that there was a need for registration of breeding operations. As for the criteria for determining whether a species is commonly bred, he asked what level of the captive population must be self-sustaining, worldwide or at the country level. He also questioned why illegal trade should be considered in determining whether a species would qualify as "commonly bred in captivity".

The Vice-Chair clarified that it is the global captive population that must be self-sustaining if a species is to be included in the list of species commonly bred in captivity. She also suggested that, in addition to being a factor for consideration by the Animals Committee, information on illegal trade in a given species might be something for the Standing Committee to consider. Such an approach would leave the Animals Committee to deal with the technical and scientific aspects of whether a species qualifies for the list, but would leave the evaluation of political and other factors to the Standing Committee. However, she stated that information on illegal trade obtained by the Animals Committee should be forwarded to the Standing Committee for consideration to assist them in the decision. She also noted that consideration of illegal trade would be especially important in cases of endemic species, especially in cases where export was prohibited by the range countries but specimens are being bred in captivity in importing countries.

The Chairman then established a working group to draft a proposed resolution to replace Resolution Conf. 8.15 on registration of operations breeding Appendix-I species in captivity for commercial purposes. The membership of the working group is contained in Annex 2A. The Chairman nominated Germany to serve as chairman of the working group to co-ordinate its activities.

27. Review of Significant Trade in Species of Animals Included in CITES Appendix II (Working Group II) (Agenda item 14)

The observer from Zimbabwe, who had chaired the working group on significant trade, presented the report of the working group (Annex 1). The Chairman noted that the review of significant trade had become increasingly complex, but it was important to the implementation of Article IV. He added that further discussion of on this topic would take place in closed session.

Dr Hoogmoed (regional representative for Europe) stated that Phelsuma quadriocellata should be treated the same as the other three Phelsuma species, and that in addition to Chamaeleogracilis, which is used for medicinal purposes in West Africa, Chamaeleo chamaeleo, in North Africa is also used for medicinal purposes.

The observer from the International Wildlife Coalition stated that he believed that Padda oryzivora was to have been included in phase 4 but had been omitted. He also suggested that the document used for the discussions of significant trade should be simplified. He noted that the working group had not had time to evaluate the process itself or to determine why non-detriment findings were not being made for some species across their range.

Dr Lieberman (regional representative for North America) stated that the document that had been prepared contained useful information but agreed that it might facilitate discussions to have the information presented in a database format for future deliberations. She also commented on the inadequacy of the data presentations, particularly in comparison to previous meetings of the Animals Committee.

The observer from TRAFFIC-International suggested that for the 60-day comment period, species with fewer than 100 specimens traded per year should not be considered. She also suggested that data should be checked for accuracy before countries are contacted, that all vicuña populations should be reviewed, not just those in Appendix II, and that all Manis spp. should be reviewed, not just M. javanica.

The Chairman closed the session at 10h30.

Eighth Session: Friday, 29 May 1998, 14h00-16h00

The Chairman announced that the working group on marking of sturgeon specimens would include the United States of America and Germany (both range States), all other range States, as well as the Secretariat and TRAFFIC-International.

28. Other Business - Import of in vitro animal-cell cultures (letter from Switzerland) (Agenda item 22)

The Chairman opened the session by reading a letter from Switzerland on in vitro cell cultures. Dr Hoogmoed (regional representative for Europe) stated that the Swiss authorities had resolved the specific problem by issuing a pre-Convention certificate for the specimens. The cell culture tissue could be traced back 30 years, and therefore the Secretariat had advised Switzerland that the issuance of a pre-Convention certificate was appropriate. Dr Hoogmoed suggested that tissue cultures should be treated like flasked orchid seedlings.

The observer from Germany stated that this brings up a more general problem, such as how blood samples are handled. He suggested that perhaps such specimens could be annotated as exempt from CITES provisions, as is done for certain parts of Appendix-II plants. As an alternative, he suggested that the Animals Committee could develop a draft resolution to address how such specimens should be handled. Dr Lieberman (regional representative for North America) advised that the United States applies some flexibility when dealing with these types of specimens, and she recommended that this issue be dealt with through a resolution. She also commented that these types of specimens do not represent a conservation risk, and that the specific problem raised by Switzerland appeared to be an intra-European problem.

Dr Lara (regional representative for Central and South America and the Caribbean) remarked that this was an issue involving genetic resources and intellectual property rights. Dr Giam (regional representative for Asia) felt that this is essentially a bilateral issue. Mr Soehartono (regional representative for Asia) stated that he did not see this as a generalized problem for CITES. The observer from the Commission for the European Union felt that there was a broader issue for CITES and that there would probably be proposals relating to such specimens at the next meeting of the Conference of the Parties.

The observer from the IWMC-the World Conservation Trust agreed with Dr Lieberman (regional representative for North America) and stated that this was not the same as the issue raised by Denmark relating to biological specimens some years previously. He also noted that these specimens could not be treated like plants, for which certain specimens could be excluded in accordance with the definition of "specimen" in Article I of CITES. He concurred with the suggestion to develop a draft resolution for relaxed treatment of these specimens because of the lack of conservation risk. The Chairman stated that it appeared that there was agreement on the need for a resolution on this issue and suggested that Switzerland should draft a resolution (either as a stand-alone or amending the existing resolution on readily recognisable parts and products) and consult with the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity to ensure that there was no conflict.

Action: Switzerland should draft a resolution relating to this matter and consult with the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity to ensure that there is no conflict in the approach adopted.

28. Other Business: documentation

There was discussion of concerns that documentation for the meeting continues to be available late, if at all. Dr Hoogmoed (regional representative for Europe) suggested that documents be distributed to all Parties before the meeting. Dr Lieberman (regional representative for North America) suggested that documents be immediately posted electronically on the CITES web page, even before they are translated. These suggestions were supported by all, and an effort will be made by the Secretariat to evaluate which countries need assistance with obtaining documents electronically. It was agreed that since almost all Parties have Internet access, it could be much cheaper to make e-mail available to those who do not, or to express mail documents to those few, rather than mailing thick document packages to everyone.

The Chairman then remarked that a summary record of this meeting would be put together to list action items and time frames for their completion (Annex 3). He noted that the Committee needed to decide the date and venue of the next meeting. The observer from Zimbabwe requested that first a brief overview be provided on the proceedings of the closed session relating to Resolution Conf. 8.9. In response the Chairman noted that:

a) the Secretariat would proceed to develop a "plain language" explanatory document (guidebook) on the Review of Significant Trade;

b) Resolution Conf. 8.9 contained redundancies and needed to be revised in a way to reflect the cyclical nature of the process;

c) both Parties and non-governmental organizations would be consulted to improve the process;

d) if the revision were not concluded before the next meeting of the Animals Committee, there would be an open meeting for all participants at that meeting; and

e) all recommendations of the working group had been accepted.

The Secretariat advised that, in closed session, it had been decided that, based on Resolution Conf. 10.2, if a Party could provide to the Secretariat a justification for not identifying specimens at the species level on a permit or certificate, the Secretariat could then confirm such permits. He noted that this issue had specifically arisen in relation to permits for hard corals from Indonesia.

The Chairman stated that he would leave it to the Secretariat to decide who should chair the working group on marking of sturgeon specimens. The Secretariat responded that rather the working group members should select a chairman. The Chairman asked the observer from Canada if someone from Canada could serve as the chairman. The observer from Canada responded that he would check to see if someone from Canada's Department of Fisheries and Oceans could serve as chairman, but he could not make a firm commitment. The Chairman then asked if the United States of America could provide a chairman, and the observer from the United States of America responded affirmatively. Dr Lieberman (regional representative for North America) noted that this was appropriate because the United States of America was both a major importer and an exporter of sturgeon specimens. The observer from the United States of America asked the Secretariat to provide a list of contacts.

29. Date and venue of the next meeting (Agenda item 23)

After some discussion, it was suggested by the Chairman that the next meeting of the Animals Committee should occur in May or June 1999. The observer from the Bahamas offered to consult with his Government about hosting the meeting, and the observer from Chile offered to serve as an alternate host if other countries were unable to host the meeting, but he acknowledged that the next meeting should probably be held in a venue outside of South America. The Chairman stated that he understood that Madagascar was also interested in hosting the next meeting. He asked the Secretariat to provide information to the Bahamas, Chile and Madagascar on the requirements for hosting a meeting, and stated that a decision would be taken after further consultations had occurred.

Action: Secretariat to provide information on hosting animals committee meeting to Chile, Bahamas and Madagascar.

The session finished with expressions of gratitude to the host country, Venezuela, and specifically to Mrs Quero de Peña (regional representative for the Central and South American and the Caribbean) and the staff of PROFAUNA staff. The Chairman also thanked all participants for a productive meeting, the Secretariat, the rapporteurs and the countries of Australia, the United Kingdom, and the United States of America for providing their services, the authors of the various documents for the meeting, the working group chairs and the interpreters. This was followed by remarks of appreciation by Mrs. Quero de Peña, on behalf of Venezuela.

The meeting was closed at 16h00.

Annex 1

REPORTS
OF THE
WORKING GROUPS

Working Group on
Review of Significant Trade in Species of Animals included in CITES Appendix II

Wednesday 27th May 1998

The Chairman introduced the documents that would be used by the working group:

Doc. AC.14.14.1

- Reconsideration of Species reviewed in Phase 1

Doc. AC.14.14.5

- Trade in Naja spp.

Doc. AC.14.14.6

- Selection of Species for Review in Phase 4

Doc. AC.14.14.6/Inf

- Species newly included in Appendix II

Doc. AC.14.14.7

- Trade in Saiga Antelope

Doc. AC.14.14.8

- Significant Trade Primary Action (submitted by EU Commission)

Doc. AC.14.14.9

- Doc. 10.55, Significant Trade in Appendix II species (from CoP10).

 

In the process, the species listed below were suggested as potential candidates for Phase 4 of this Review of Significant Trade. However, it was also agreed that observers were invited to submit, within 60 days, the names of additional candidate species and information to the Chairman of the Committee, directly in the case of a Party or, in the case of an national NGO observers, through a Party or, in the case of international NGOs, through the Secretariat.

List of Species Identified as Potential Candidates for Phase 4
of the Review of Significant Trade

Mammals

Galagoides demidoff
Manis spp. - it was agreed that, following the inclusion in the appendices of the African species, this whole genus merits attention.
Tayassu spp. (incl. Pecari tajacu and Tayassu pecari) - (PE) previously Phase 2
Hippopotamus amphibius
Vicugna vicugna (PE, CL)
Saiga tatarica
Moschus spp. - previously Phase 2.

 

Birds

Agapornis canus - previously Phase 1. EU commissioned field study on this species.
Amazona amazonica (GY, SR)
Amazona farinosa (GY)
Amazona ochrocephala (GY, SR)
Ara ararauna (GY, SR) previously Phase 2
Ara chloropterus (GY, SR) previously Phase 2
Ara manilata (GY, SR)
Ara nobilis (GY, SR)
Cacatua ducorpsii (SB)
Pionites melanocephala (GY, SR)
Poicephalus robustus
Pycnonotus zeylanicus - included in Appendix II at CoP10
Liocichla omeiensis - included in Appendix II at CoP10
Gracula religiosa - included in Appendix II at CoP10

 

It was noted that a generic approach to the trade in birds from Guyana (GY) and Suriname (SR) might be most appropriate.

Reptiles

Geochelone pardalis (MZ, ZM, CD)
Phelsuma spp. - subject to a previous Phase 2 recommendation from the Standing Committee to suspend imports of all but the following three species: Phelsuma laticauda, P. lineata, P. madagascariensis

These three species are selected for inclusion in Phase 4. The trade data for P. quadriocellata indicate a high volume of trade in 1996, which should be considered in the Animals Committee review.

Uromastyx aegyptius (EG)
Bradypodion spp. & Chamaeleo spp. (MG only)
Chamaeleo quadricornis (CM)
Corucia zebrata (SB)
Calabaria reinhardtii
Python regius (BJ, GH, TG, ML)
Naja spp. - what was formerly Naja naja has recently been split into eight species, which will be examined in Phase 4.
Callagur borneoensis - included in Appendix II at CoP10

Amphibians

Dendrobates tinctorius (SR)
Mantella aurantiaca (MG)
Rana tigrina (VN)

Fish

Acipenseriformes spp. - those species in Appendix II. It was suggested that the most appropriate action in terms of Resolution Conf. 10.12, paragraph (i), was that the Committee should formulate a primary recommendation to each range State asking on what basis non-detriment findings are being made.

Other Actions

It was recommended that the Committee should address enquiries regarding the following to the Parties rather than proceed with inclusion in Phase 4

Mammals

Pteropus vampyrus - ID 1,400 specimens in 1996
Papio hamadryas anubis - TZ 274 trophies in 1994
Pseudalopex culpaeus - AR 16 in 1995 to 3,982 in 1996
Pseudalopex griseus - AR increase from 4,395 in 1995 to 79,101 in 1996
Vulpes zerda - EG Exports 94/95
Conepatus humboldtii - AR 3,320 in 1996
Lutra spp. - US reporting to genus only in 1996
Lynx canadensis - CA 30,852 in 1995
Lynx rufus - CA increase 8,270 in 1996 and US declined to 0 in 1996

Birds

Balearica pavonina - GN
Psittacus erithacus timneh -SN, ZA
Java sparrow - general concerns over trade levels
Padda oryzivora

Reptilia

Indotestudo elongata -CN 300 in 1995 to 1,144 in 1996
Indotestudo forstenii - increase in 1996 ID
Kinixys belliana - previously Phase 2. MZ, BJ, GH and TG wild/ranched/captive-bred ?
Kinixys erosa - previously Phase 2. GH, BJ, TG wild/ranched/captive-bred ?
Kinixys homeana - previously Phase 2. GH, BJ, TG wild/ranched/captive-bred ?
Testudo hermanni - UA 4,000 in 1995
Caiman crocodilus crocodilus - CO increase from 736 in 1995 to 14,004 1996; & GY request update on management plan.
Uromastyx acanthinurus - ML large increase in 1996
Uromastyx benti -YE large increase in 1996
Uromastyx geyri - ML large increase in 1996
Bradypodion fischeri - TZ basis of quota
Chamaeleo dilepis - MZ large increase in 1996
Chamaeleo fuelleborni - TZ large increase in 1996
Chamaeleo jacksonii - TZ basis for quota
Cordylus tropidosternum - TZ basis for quota
Candoia carinata - ID large increase in 1996
Python curtus - MY large increase in volume from 1994
Python sebae - SD large increase 1996
Ptyas mucosus - SG & US information on re-export

Time did not permit the review of invertebrates.

Species identified as used for traditional medicine

Mammals

Manis spp.
Arctocephalus pusillus
Saiga tatarica*
Moschus spp.*

Reptiles

Indotestudo elongata
Uromastyx spp.*
Chamaeleo dilepis
Chamaeleo senegalensis
Chamaeleo chamaeleo
Chamaeleo gracilis
Python reticulatus
Python sebae*
Naja spp.*

* Included in Phase 4 on the basis of population concerns

Report of the Working Group on Issues Relating to Specimens Bred in Captivity

The Working Group discussed three major issues: the establishment of a list of species commonly bred in captivity [Resolution Conf. 10.16, paragraph b)ii)C)2.b)]; the definition of "bred in captivity for commercial purposes" (Decision 10.77, re. Article VII, paragraph 4); and the registration of operations breeding specimens of Appendix-I species in captivity for commercial purposes (Decision 10.77).

The first issue pertains to Resolution Conf. 10.16, paragraph b)ii)C)2.a. This paragraph refers to the production of a list of species commonly bred in captivity to the second or subsequent generation, that is established and amended by the Standing Committee, on the basis of proposals submitted by the Animals Committee after consultation with range States and experts in captive breeding and in the species in question. The Working Group recommends adoption of the following criteria for inclusion of species in the list of species commonly bred in captivity:

The species is regularly bred in captivity (in accordance with the provisions of Resolution Conf. 10.16) at numerous facilities, and the captive population of the species is self-sustaining.

The Working Group recommends the following process for inclusion of species in this list:

1. A Notification should be sent by the CITES Secretariat to all Parties inviting the submission of proposals for the inclusion of species in the list. The draft of this Notification should be circulated among members of the Animals Committee for their comments.

2. The Notification should ask Parties to submit these proposals either to their regional representatives on the Animals Committee (for forwarding to the Secretariat) or direct to the Secretariat.

3. The Notification should provide guidance to Parties on the information that should be contained in the proposals. It should also clarify the nature of the list and its purpose in the context of Resolution Conf. 10.16.

4. The proposals should be circulated to Animals Committee members in sufficient time prior to the next meeting of the Animals Committee to allow for regional consultation.

5. The next meeting of the Animals Committee should review the proposals, based on the aforementioned criteria, and agree upon a list of species to circulate to range States and relevant experts for comment. Range states, IUCN/SSC specialist groups and experts should be asked to provide comments within 60 days and to specify the basis for any objections to inclusion of species in the list.

6. These comments should be assembled by the Secretariat and provided to the Animals Committee, which should decide (by postal procedures) on the list of species to submit to the Standing Committee. The proposals should be submitted to the Standing Committee for approval (together with the comments of range States). The Standing Committee should consider not only the information in the proposal and comments but also information on illegal trade in the species.

The Notification to the Parties inviting proposals should clarify that, if a species is not included in the list, Parties may still issue permits or certificates identifying specimens as bred in captivity, based on their assessment that the specimens qualify as such under Resolution Conf. 10.16. Furthermore, specimens of species included in the list must still meet the other requirements of the resolution before a permit or certificate can be issued. The development of this list should be seen as expediting decision-making by Management and Scientific Authorities.

The Working Group noted that, after the Standing Committee establishes the list of species, the process will continue whereby the Animals Committee proposes amendments (additions or deletions) to this list.

Decision 10.77 directs the Animals Committee to "consider the proposed definition of 'bred in captivity for commercial purposes' in document Doc. 10.67."

The Working Group discussed the meaning of the term "bred in captivity for commercial purposes" in Article VII, paragraph 4, and agreed upon the following definition:

bred to obtain economic benefit, whether in cash or kind, with the intention of sale, exchange, provision of a service or another form of economic use or benefit.

The Working Group agreed that this definition was linked to its recommendations regarding the registration of facilities breeding Appendix-I species in captivity for commercial purposes. The Working Group agreed to accept this relatively broad definition, noting that it would consequently be necessary to modify the procedures currently in effect relating to export of specimens from these facilities.

Decision 10.77 also directs the Animals Committee to "examine the effectiveness of and the need for the existing registration system for operations breeding specimens of Appendix-I species in captivity for commercial purposes".

The Working Group discussed the utility of registration of captive-breeding operations (for Appendix-I species). Although there was not a consensus, there was a majority in support of retaining a two-tiered registration system, as follows:

Management Authorities should submit to the Secretariat the names of facilities breeding Appendix-I species in captivity for commercial purposes (as defined above), for which they have issued or will issue export documents in accordance with Article VII.4, including the names of the species involved. The Secretariat should retain, on a database, a list of all these facilities and the Appendix-I species concerned. For hobbyists, zoos and other small-scale producers, no further registration process should be required.

For large-scale commercial operations, the Working Group agreed on several general principles, which should be incorporated by a working group of the Animals Committee into a draft resolution to replace Resolution Conf. 8.15, for discussion at the next regular meeting of the Animals Committee. Some of those principles are:

• The new registration process should be streamlined.

• The registration should continue to involve consultation with the Parties, particularly range States for the species.

• The Parties should consider the procedures used for nursery registration (Resolution Conf. 9.19).

• Proposals for registration should be reviewed by the Animals Committee, before circulation to the Parties for comment.

• A breeding operation should be registered only if the Party submitting it has adequate legislation implementing the Convention.

• The registration process should be expedited for breeding operations being registered for a species included in the list of species commonly bred in captivity [Conf 10.16, paragraph b)ii)C)2.a)].

• A new resolution (replacing Conf. 8.15) must take into consideration all aspects of Resolution Conf. 10.16, including the legality of origin of parental stock.

• The production capability (including anticipated export levels) of a facility should continue to be taken into consideration.

• Explicit time frames should be included in the resolution proposed to replace Conf.  8.15.

• In drafting the resolution to replace Conf. 8.15, the following should be taken into consideration: document Doc. 10.67 of the 10th meeting of the Conference of the Parties and Doc.AC.14.9.1.

Other outstanding issues were not resolved, but it is recommended that the Animals Committee establish a working group to develop such a new resolution between this meeting and the next meeting of the Animals Committee. The Chairwoman of the present Working Group will share with the working group to be convened the other concerns that were raised within the present Working Group.


Annex 2a

AC14 Captive Breeding Working Group - Chair: Germany

Dr Dietrich Jelden
Bundesamt für Naturschutz
Konstantinstr. 110
53179 Bonn
GERMANY
Phone (49) 228-9543-0
Fax (49) 228-9543 470
email: [email protected]

Dr Jean Ngog Nje
Directeur
Ecole de Fauna
B.P. 271
Garoua
CAMEROON
Phone (237) 273 135, (237) 271 125
Fax (237) 273 135; 271 800; 272 022

Prof. Kim Howell
University of Dar es Salaam
Department of Zoology and Marine Biology
P.O. Box 35064
Dar-es-Salaam
UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
Phone (255 51) 410 597
Fax (255 51) 410 393
email: [email protected]

Dr Susan Lieberman
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Office of Scientific Authority
4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Room 750
Arlington, VA 22203
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Phone (1703) 358 1708
Fax (1703) 358 2276
email: [email protected]

Mr Agustin Iriarte Walton
Autoridad Administrativa CITES
Servicio Agrícola y Ganadero
Avenida Bulnes 140
Santiago
CHILE
Phone (56 2) 672 1394
Fax (56 2) 699 2778
email: [email protected]

Dr Maurice Isaacs
Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries
P.O. Box N 3028
Nassau
BAHAMAS
Phone (242) 325 1173
Fax (242) 328 5874
email: [email protected]

Mr Wang Sung
Endangered Species Scientific Commission, PRC
19 Zhongguancun Lu, Haidian
Beijing100080 / CHINA
Phone (8610) 6264 7675; 6256 4680
Fax (8619) 6264 7675; 6256 2717
email: [email protected]
email: [email protected]

Ms Alison Rosser
IUCN/SSC Wildlife Trade Programme
219c Huntingdon Rd
Cambridge
UNITED KINGDOM, CB3 0DL
Phone (44) 1223-277 966
Fax (44) 1223-277 845
email: [email protected]

Mr Juan Carlos Cantu Guzman
Greenpeace Mexico
Ahuehuetes Sur 811
Col. Bosques de as lomas
C.P. 11700 Mexico Distrito Federal
MEXICO
Phone (525) 251 60 96
Fax (525) 251 60 96
email: [email protected]

Mr Anthony Crosswell
British Falconers Club
Sneath Farm
High Green
Great Moulton
Norwich NR15 2HN
UNITED KINGDOM
Phone (44) 1-379 677 296
Fax (44) 1-379 677 296

Dr Teresa Telecky
Humane Society of the United States
2100 L Street NW
Washington, D.C. 20037
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Phone (1) 301-258 3142
Fax (1) 301-258 3080

Annex 2b
 

AC14 Marking Working Group - Chair: Czech Republic
 

Mr Petr SVEC
Ministry of the Environment
Vrsovicka 65
Praha 10
CZECH REPUBLIC
Tel.: (4202) 6712 24 50
Fax: (4202) 6731 10 96
E-mail: [email protected]

Lic. Mirna QUERO de PEÑA
Ministerio del Ambiente y de los Recursos
Naturales renovables (MARNR)
Dirección General
Servicio Autónomo PROFAUNA - MARNR
Centro Simón Bolívar
Edificio Camejo (frente al Pasaje Zingg)
Entrada Oeste; Nivel Mezzanina
Caracas 1010
VENEZUELA
Tel: (582) 545 4257 ; 508 1514
Fax: (582) 545 4257
E-mail: [email protected]

Dr Susan LIEBERMAN
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Office of Scientific Authority
4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Room 750
Arlington, VA 22203
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1703) 358 1708
Fax: (1703) 358 2276
E-mail: [email protected]

Dr Maurice Isaacs
Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries
P.O. Box N 3028
Nassau
BAHAMAS
Phone (242) 325 1173
Fax (242) 328 5874
email: [email protected]

Dr Ricardo GLUYAS MILLAN
Procuraduría Federal de Protección al Ambiemte
Subprocuraduría de Recursos Naturales
Periférico Sur 5000
Col. Insurgentes Cuicuilco
Delegación Coyoacán
C.P.04530 Mexico, DF
MEXICO
Tel.: (52 5) 666 9311; 528 5554
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Ms Betty M. BAQUERO de PEDRET
ZOOCONSULT
Urb. Trigal Norte, Avenida Autocinema
Res. Trigal Country, Edf. 1, Apto. 1-24
Valencia, Edo. de Carabobo
VENEZUELA
Tel.: (58 41) 430 806
Fax: (58 41) 430 654
E-mail: [email protected]

Mr Anthony CROSSWELL
British Falconers Club
Sneath Farm
High Green
Great Moulton
Norwich NR15 2HN
UNITED KINGDOM
Tel.: (44) 1-379 677 296
Fax: (44) 1-379 677 296
E-mail: [email protected]

Mr Bruce TAUBERT
International Association of Fish and
Wildlife Agencies
Arizona Game and Fish Department
2221 West Greenway Road
Phoenix, Arizona 85023
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1) 602-789 3301
Fax: (1) 602-789 3920
E-mail: [email protected]

Mr Donald BRUNING
Chairman and Curator
Wildlife Conservation Society
185th Street and Southern Boulevard
Bronx, New York 10460-1099
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1 718) 220 5159
Fax: (1 718) 733 7300
E-mail: [email protected]

Annex 2c

AC14 Transport Working Group - Chair: Germany
 

Dr Irina Sprotte
Bundesamt für Naturschutz
Konstantinstr. 110
53179 Bonn
GERMANY
Phone (49) 228-9543-0
Fax (49) 228-9543 470
email: [email protected]

Dr Katalin Rodics
Agency for Nature Conservation
Department for Wildlife Protection
Költö u. 21
H-1121 Budapest
HUNGARY
Phone (36-1) 156 2133; 395 2605
Fax: (361) 175 7857; 175 7457
email: [email protected]

Mr Tony Soehartono
D.G. of Forest Protection and Nature Conservation
Ministry of Forestry
Jalan Gatot Subroto
Jakarta Pusat 10270
INDONESIA
Phone (6221) 572 0227
Fax (6221) 572 0227
email: [email protected]

Mr Obed Mbabgwa
Wildlife Division
Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism
Ivory Room
Nyerere Road, P.O. Box 1994
Dar-es-Salaam
UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
Phone (25551) 866 408
Fax (25551) 863 496
email: [email protected]

Dr Rosemarie Gnam
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Office of the Management Authority
4401 N. Fairfax Dr, Room 436B
Arlington, VA 22203
Phone (1703) 358 5428
Fax (1703) 358 2298
email: [email protected]

Dr Edson Chidziya
Department of National Parks and
Wildlife Management
P.O. Box CY 140
Causewax
Harare
ZIMBABWE
Phone (2634) 792 786-9
Fax (2634) 724 914

Mr Marshall Meyers
Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council (PIJAC)
122 19th St. NW
Washington, D.C.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Phone (1202) 466 8270
Fax (1202) 293 4377
email: [email protected]

Dr Arthur Lindley
Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty
to Animals (RSPCA)
c/o Wildlife Department
Causeway
Horsham, West Sussex RH12 1 HG
UNITED KINGDOM
Phone (441 403) 264 181
Fax (441 403) 218 042
email: [email protected]

Dr Teresa Telecky
Humane Society of the United States (HSUS)
2100 L Street, NW
Washington, DC 20037
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Phone (1301) 258 3142
Fax (1301) 258 3080
email: [email protected]

Dr Koen Brouwer
European Association of Zoos and Aquaria (EAZA)
Executive Office
c/o Amsterdam Zoo
P.O. Box 20164
1000 HD Amsterdam
THE NETHERLANDS
Phone (3120) 520 0753
Fax (3120) 520 0754
email:[email protected]

Mr Donald Bruning
Ornithology Department
New York Zoological Society
185th Street and Southern Boulevard
Bronx, NY 10460-1099
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Phone (1718) 220 5159
Fax (1718) 733 7300
email: [email protected]

Dr Thomas Althaus
Office vétérinaire fédéral
Schwarzenburgstr. 161
CH - 3003 Liebefeld-Bern
SWITZERLAND
Phone (4131) 323 8508-9
Fax (4131) 323 8522
email: [email protected]
 

Dr Ger van Vliet
CITES Secretariat
15, chemin des Anémones
1219 Châtelaine/Genève
SWITZERLAND
Phone (4122) 917 8120
Fax (4122) 797 3417
email: [email protected]
 
 

Annex 3

ACTIONS ARISING FROM AC14

ACTION ITEM

RESPONSIBILITY

DUE DATE

Rules of Procedure

Secretariat to review rules of Standing Committee and Plants Committee and develop standard.

 

Secretariat/Chairman

 

Next AC meeting

Guidelines for Scientific Authorities

IUCN to report on progress with capacity building workshops.

 

IUCN

 

Next AC meeting

Crocodile Tagging (Resolution Conf. 9.22)

IUCN/SSC Crocodile Specialist Group to co-ordinate proposed amendments to Doc. AC.14.8 and transmit draft revision of Resolution Conf. 9.22 to the Chairman for consideration by the 15th meeting of the Committee

 

IUCN CSG/Chairman

 

Next AC meeting

Ranched Specimens (Resolution Conf. 8.22)

Chairman to incorporate views of the meeting as amendments and submit a revised Resolution Conf. 8.22 for consideration by the 15th meeting of the Committee.

 

Chairman

 

Next AC meeting

Alien Species (Decisions 10.75 and 10.76)

Secretariat to circulate a Notification requesting Parties to provide information on experiences with invasive species and to identify potential invasive species. Secretariat to collate response and send to IUCN/SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group.

 

Secretariat in collaboration with Chairman and IUCN/SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group.

 

Ongoing

Significant Trade (Implementation of Resolution Conf. 8.9)

 

Secretariat to prepare draft guidelines booklet on implementation of Resolution Conf. 8.9.

 

Hard Corals: Secretariat to clarify location of final report on hard corals and circulate to members of the Committee for review pursuant to the provisions of Resolution Conf. 8.9.

 

Chamaeleo gracilis: In order to obtain a regional perspective of management, the Secretariat to write to the Management Authorities of Benin, Togo and Ghana requesting the information that is presently available on the distribution and abundance of Chamaeleo gracilis in those countries as the basis for managing the species.

 

Monodon monoceros: CITES Management Authority of Canada to provide the Committee with survey results that demonstrate sustainability of present harvest levels.

 

Poicephalus gulielmi: Secretariat to continue its efforts to obtain the necessary information from the Management Authority of Côte d'Ivoire.

 

Chlorocebus aethiops: Secretariat to communicate with the Management Authority of Ethiopia to ascertain export levels of this species since the export ban was lifted.

 

Geochelone sulcata: The Secretariat to consult the Management Authority of Mali to ascertain the scientific basis by which exports of this species are permitted. Based on the information provided by Mali, the Committee should consider the need, or otherwise, for action under Resolution Conf. 8.9.

 

Varanus indicus: The Secretariat to write to the competent authority of the Solomon Islands seeking advice on the basis by which annual export levels of Varanus indicus are established and the mechanisms that have been established to ensure that established annual quotas are not exceeded. Based on the information received, the Committee should consider whether or not further action, pursuant to Resolution Conf. 8.9, is warranted. The Secretariat should also advise the competent authority of the Solomon Islands of recent nomenclatural changes, requesting future export permits use the name Varanus spinulosus.

 

Psittacula alexandri: Secretariat to write to the Management Authority of Viet Nam requesting advice on the reason(s) for the decline in recent years of exports of this species from Viet Nam.

 

Strombus gigas: AC representatives for the Central and South America and Caribbean region to write to range States [that have not responded to the Secretariat letters] requesting prompt responses.

 

Strombus gigas: AC Chairman to write to the Standing Committee advising of the outcome of discussions on the issue, requesting an extension to the response deadline to enable sufficient time for the regional consultation.

 

 

Secretariat

 

Secretariat

 

 

Secretariat

 

 

 

Canada

 

 

Secretariat

 

 

Secretariat

 

 

Secretariat

 

 

 

Secretariat

 

 

 

 

Secretariat

 

 

Central and South America and Caribbean region representative

 

Chairman

 

 

ASAP

 

ASAP

 

 

ASAP

 

 

 

ASAP

 

 

ASAP

 

 

ASAP

 

 

ASAP

 

 

 

ASAP

 

 

 

 

ASAP

 

 

ASAP

 

ASAP

Trade in Sharks (Implementation of Resolution Conf. 9.17)

 

Secretariat to notify Parties of forth coming meeting on this topic and to encourage MAs to liaise with there respective fisheries authorities.

 

Chairman to write letter to FAO to elaborate on issues of concern to CITES and to request continued liaison and involvement in FAO deliberations on this issue.

 

 

Secretariat

 

 

Chairman

 

 

ASAP

 

 

ASAP

Marking System for Sturgeons

AC to form working group to consider marking issue. Working Group to be chaired by the USA, members to include all range states, major importing countries, TRAFFIC International and the Secretariat.

 

The Secretariat is to provide a list of contacts to the USA.

 

USA - Chair working group

 

Hard Corals

Chairman to write to Standing Committee recommending that permits be accepted as issued.

 

Indonesia be request to advise Secretariat on difficulties issuing permits to species level

 

Review Resolutions Conf. 9.6 and Conf. 10.22

 

Chairman

 

Secretariat/Asian Representative

 

Chairman

 

ASAP

 

ASAP

 

Next AC meeting

Collocailia spp

Dr Giam to report on the outcome of the meeting of task force to the 15th meeting of the Committee

 

Dr Giam

 

Next AC meeting

Transport of Live Animals (Implementation of Resolution Conf. 10.21)

Chairmanship of working group to pass to Germany (yet to be confirmed).

 

Secretariat should collect information on reasons for mortality in transport and monitor implementation of Resolution Conf. 10.21 and report findings to Parties.

 

Secretariat to send Notification requesting Parties to provide information on whether IATA Regulations have been referred to in legislation relating to the transport of live animals.

 

Chairman

 

Secretariat

 

 

Secretariat

 

ASAP

 

ASAP

 

 

ongoing

Marking (microchips)

Working group to revise Resolution Conf. 8.13 for next meeting of COP. Working group to be chaired by Czech Republic. Membership outlined in Annex 2B.

 

Czech Republic

 

Next AC meeting

Traditional Medicines (Implementation of Decision 10.82)

Secretariat to send Notification to all Parties requesting that they supply all available trade data on all known species used in traditional medicines

 

Secretariat

 

ASAP

Hybrids

Secretariat to notify Parties that the term "recent lineage" should be interpreted as meaning the last four generations. Secretariat would also ask Parties to inform them of any problems they encounter with this definition.

 

Secretariat

 

ASAP

Breeding in Captivity, Commercial Purposes (Resolution Conf. 8.15)

Working group formed to draft a revised Resolution Conf. 8.15. Chaired by Germany and including North American region, African region, Chile, China, Bahamas, IUCN, British Falconry Club, Greenpeace Mexico, HSUS.

 

Germany

 

Next AC meeting

Other Business

 

In Vitrocell cultures: Switzerland should draft a resolution relating to this matter and consult with the Secretariat of the Convention on Biological Diversity to ensure that there is no conflict in the approach adopted.

 

Introduction from the sea: Australia, United States of America and Japan to discuss this matter between them and determine an appropriate response.

 

Trade data: Secretariat to request WCMC to standardise how data is reported and to distinguish between export and re-exports.

 

Next meeting: Secretariat to provide information on hosting Animals Committee meeting to Chile, Bahamas and Madagascar

 

Switzerland

 

 

Australia

 

 

Secretariat

 

 

Secretariat

 


Annex 4

Translation of the speech of Dr Rafael Martínez Monro, Minister for the Environment and Renewable Natural Resources of Venezuela during the opening ceremony of the 14th meeting of the CITES Animals Committee.

Representatives of the CITES Secretariat: Jim Armstrong, Jonathan Barzdo, John Kundaeli and Obdulio Menghi

President of the Animals Committee, Dr. Robert Hank Jenkins, and other members of the Animals Committee

CITES Management Authorities

Non-Governmental Organizations and other participants in this meeting

Ladies and Gentlemen

For Venezuela and especially for the Ministry for the Environment and Renewable Natural Resources, it is, indeed, an honour to act as the host country for the fourteenth meeting of the Animals Committee of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) bringing together approximately 150 delegates, participants and guests from the five continents of the world. Our country, one of the richest in the world's biological diversity, acceded to the Convention in 1973 and ratified it in 1976. It should be pointed out that it was also at that same time that a historical high point for environmental policy in Venezuela occurred with the creation of the Ministry for the Environment and Renewable Natural Resources. The ministry has been charged with the fundamental objective of including consideration of the environment in Venezuela's socio-economic development, guaranteeing sustainable development, applying a coherent environmental policy within the rule of law, promoting an understanding of our environmental heritage, encouraging basic and applied research, advising on environmentally sound technological development, strengthening training in this field, striving to improve the quality of life, guaranteeing the rational and sustainable use of renewable natural resources and protecting the national environmental heritage, taking into account that there is an optimum use of the environment and that environmental policy goes beyond the confines of Venezuela. As a result, all of this has led to reinforcement of the application of the Convention in Venezuela; application of this Convention together with other international treaties to which Venezuela is a signatory such as Ramsar and Biological Diversity which form an important part of our strategy for the conservation of nature. Government officials that work in this area have been trained, gained experience and excelled with an awareness and respect for the Resolutions adopted by this Convention which, as far as we are concerned, is one of the most important legal instruments for international co-operation in the conservation of wild fauna and flora on our planet.

This is brought out by the fact that today we can count a representative of Venezuela on this important technical committee that is beginning deliberations.

I would like to call your attention to and reiterate that environmental questions affect the entire world and, therefore, require international co-operation, specifically as concerns wildlife in international trade. This is extremely important, because we shall be able to protect these resources and take effective steps if we share and expand our knowledge of the environment, its influence on the ecosystem and other natural mechanisms that affect the status of conservation. It is obviously to CITES that goes the role of setting the international legal framework for the regulation of trade in species threatened or vulnerable to extinction giving the producer and consumer countries their part of the shared responsibility and establishing the required mechanisms for inspiring international co-operation for sustainable development.

We sincerely hope that the discussions beginning today contribute to the consolidation of the important work begun 25 years ago and which has inspired us.

Finally, I wish you a pleasant stay in Venezuela and invite you to visit an exhibition of our rich natural heritage conserved in our national parks, nature reserves, forest and wildlife reserves that I am certain will contribute to the reaffirmation of our faith in the future of the conservation of nature.

Rafael Martínez Monro
Minister for the Environment and
Renewable Natural Resources

Annex 5

14th Meeting of CITES Animals Committee
Caracas, Venezuela, 25-29 May 1998

LIST OF PARTICIPANTS (as of 12.06.98)

Members of the Committee

 

Dr Choo-Hoo GIAM
78 Jalan Haji Alias
Singapore 268559
REPUBLIC OF SINGAPORE
Tel.: (65) 466 6486
Fax: (65) 463 4853
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Dr Marinus HOOGMOED
CITES-Committee NNM
Postbus 9517
2300 RA Leiden
THE NETHERLANDS
Tel.: (3171) 568 76 18
Fax: (3171) 568 76 66
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Prof. Kim HOWELL
University of Dar es Salaam
Department of Zoology and Marine Biology
P.O. Box 35064
Dar-es-Salaam
UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
Tel.: (255 51) 410 597 (House No. 5, Korohoni Road, UDSM Campus)
Fax:c/o (255 51) 410 393
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Dr Robert W.G. JENKINS
Chairman of the CITES Animals Committee
Environment Australia
P.O. Box 636
Canberra, ACT 2601
AUSTRALIA
Tel.: (612) 625 00 392
Fax: (612) 625 00 243
E-mail: [email protected]

Lic. Oscar Francisco LARA
5a. Calle 0-18, Zona 1
Ciudad de Guatemala
GUATEMALA
Tel.: (502) 232 6062
Fax: (502) 332 0464; 476 9808
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Dr Susan LIEBERMAN
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Office of Scientific Authority
4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Room 750
Arlington, VA 22203
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1703) 358 1708
Fax: (1703) 358 2276
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Dr Jean NGOG NJE
Directeur
Ecole de Fauna
B.P. 271
Garoua
CAMEROON
Tel.: (237) 273 135; 271 125
Fax: (237) 273 135; 271 800; 272 022
E-mail:
 
Lic. Mirna QUERO de PEÑA
Ministerio del Ambiente y de los Recursos
Naturales renovables (MARNR)
Dirección General
Servicio Autónomo PROFAUNA - MARNR
Centro Simón Bolívar
Edificio Camejo (frente al Pasaje Zingg)
Entrada Oeste; Nivel Mezzanina
Caracas 1010
VENEZUELA
Tel: (582) 545 4257 ; 508 1514
Fax: (582) 545 4257
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Dr Katalin RODICS
Ministry for Environment and Regional Policy
Authority for Nature Conservation
CITES Management Authority
Költö u. 21
H-1121 Budapest XII
HUNGARY
Tel.: (361) 395 2605/155; 395 7458
Fax: (361) 175 7457; 395 7458
E-mail:
 
 
Mr Tonny SOEHARTONO
Ministry of Forestry
D.G. of Forest Protection and Nature Conservation
Dep. Kehutanan Lt. 8
Jalan Gatot Subroto
Jakarta 10270
INDONESIA
Tel./Fax: (6221) 572 0227 or (62 251) 346 628
E-mail: [email protected]

 
 

Alternate Members of the Committee

Mr Edson CHIDZIYA
Department of National Parks & Wildlife Management
Box CY140
Causeway
Harare
ZIMBABWE
Tel.: (2634) 723 154; 707 624-9; 792 786-9
Fax: (2634) 724 914
 
Mr Charles DAUPHINE
Canadian Wildlife Service
Environment Canada
Ottawa, Ontario
CANADA K1A 0H3
Tel.: (1) 819 953 1429
Fax: (1) 819 953 6283
E-mail: [email protected]

Mr Rod HAY
Department of Conservation
Private Bag 4715
Christchurch
NEW ZEALAND
Tel.: (643) 379 9758
Fax: (643) 365 1388
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr Sixto J. INCHAUSTEGUI
Autoridad Científica CITES
Grupo Jaraguá
El Vergel 33, El Vergel
Santo Domingo
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC
Tel.: (1 809) 472 1036
Fax: (1) 809 531 3508
E-mail: [email protected]
 
Dr Tom TEW
Joint Nature Conservation Committee
Monkstone House
City Road
Peterborough PE1 1 JY
UNITED KINGDOM
Tel.: (44) 1733- 866 871
Fax: (44) 1733- 555 948
E-mail: [email protected] jncc.gov.uk
 
 
 

Observers (CITES Parties)

Mr Luis R. AREVALO CASTILLO
Dirección General de Sanidad Vegetal y Animal
Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería
Final 1a. avenida Norte
Nueva San Salvador
EL SALVADOR
Tel.: (503) 288 5220
Fax: (503) 228 90 29
E-mail: [email protected]
 
Lic. Ricardo BABARRO
Ministerio del Ambiente y de los Recursos
Naturales Renovables (MARNR)
Servicio Autónomo PROFAUNA - MARNR
Centro Simón Bolívar
Edificio Camejo (frente al Pasaje Zingg)
Entrada Oeste; Nivel Mezzanina
Caracas 1010
VENEZUELA
Tel: (582) 545 4257 ; 508 1514
Fax: (582) 545 4257
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Lic. Federico BARROSO
Ministerio del Ambiente y de los Recursos
Naturales Renovables (MARNR)
Servicio Autónomo PROFAUNA - MARNR
Centro Simón Bolívar
Edificio Camejo (frente al Pasaje Zingg)
Entrada Oeste; Nivel Mezzanina
Caracas 1010
VENEZUELA
Tel: (582) 545 4257 ; 508 1514
Fax: (582) 545 4257
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Licda. Carolina BELTRAN
Ministerio de Agricultura y Cría
Servicio Autónomo de los Recursos Pesqueros
y Acuicolas (SARPA)
División de Tratados Internacionales
Torre Este, piso 10
Parque Central
Caracas 1010
VENEZUELA
Tel: (58 2) 571 4889
Fax: (58 2) 571 4889
E-mail:[email protected]
 
 
Mr Salvador BOHER
FUNPZA-MARNR
PROFAUNA
Centro Simón Bolívar
Edif. Camejo, Nivel Mezzanina
Apartado Postal 3985
1010 Caracas
VENEZUELA
Tel.: (58 2) 482 6279
Fax: (58 2) 542 3912
 
Ms Elvira CARRILLO CARDENAS
Center of Fisheries Research
Ministry of Fishing Industry
5th Ave Corner 248
Barlovento Santa Fe
Havana
REPUBLIC OF CUBA
Tel.: (537) 297 143
Fax: (537) 249 827
E-mail: -
 
Mr Yiu-keung CHAN
Endangered Species Protection Division
Agriculture & Fisheries Department
12/F Canton Road Government Offices
393 Canton Road, Kowloon
Hong Kong
CHINA
Tel.: (852) 2733 21 26
Fax: (852) 2311 37 31
E-mail: [email protected]
 
Ms Nancy DAVES
National Marine Fisheries Service
1315 East-West Hwy
Silver Spring
Maryland 20910
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1 301) 713 2319
Fax: (1 301) 713 0379
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Ms Petra DEIMER
Garstedter Weg 4
D-25474 Hasloh
GERMANY
Tel.: (49) 4106 47 12
Fax: (49) 4106 47 75
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Ms Sheila EINSWEILER
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
Division of Law Enforcement
4401 N. Faiarfax Drive Room 500
Arlington, Virginia 22203
UNITED STATES OF AMERCIA
Tel.: (1) 703-358 1949
Fax: (1) 703-358 2271
E-mail: [email protected]
 
Dr Gerhard EMONDS
Federal Ministry for the Environment, Nature
Conservation and Nuclear Safety
Naturschutz - Referat N I 3
Godesberger Allee 90
D-53175 Bonn
GERMANY
Tel.: (49) 228-305 26 30
Fax: (49) 228-305 26 97
E-mail: -
 
Dr Ricardo GLUYAS MILLAN
Procuraduría Federal de Protección al Ambiemte
Subprocuraduría de Recursos Naturales
Periférico Sur 5000
Col. Insurgentes Cuicuilco
Delegación Coyoacán
C.P.04530
Mexico, DF
MEXICO
Tel.: (52 5) 666 9311; 528 5554
Fax:
E-mail: [email protected]
 
Dr Rosemarie GNAM
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Office of the Management Authority
4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Room 750
Arlington, VA 22203
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1703) 358 2095
Fax: (1703) 358 2298
E-mail: [email protected]
 
Ms Sandra GUEVARA
Ministerio de Relaciones Exteriores
Avenida Urdaneda, Esq. de Carmelitas
Caracas
VENEZUELA
Tel.: (58 2) 862 6874; 806 1455
Fax: (58 2)
E-mail:
 
 
Mr Héctor GOSENDE
Embajada Argentina
Avenida El Empalme
Edif. FEDECAMARAS
Urb. El bosque, Apartado postal 569
Carmelitas 1010 - Caracas
VENEZUELA
Tel.: (58 2) 731 3311
Fax: (58 2) 731 2659
E-mail:
 
Ms Birgit HEINZE
Federal Agency for Nature Conservation
Konstantinstrasse 110
D-53179 Bonn
GERMANY
Tel.: (49) 228-8491 121
Fax: (49) 228-8491 119
E-mail: [email protected]
 
Dr Jonathan HUTTON
Representative of the
Department of National Parks and Wild Life Management
P.O. Box A860
Avondale, Harare
ZIMBABWE
Tel.: (263) 4-732 625
Fax: (263) 4-731 719
E-mail: [email protected]
 
Mr Vladimir IGNATOV
Embassy of the Russian Federation
Representación del Centro Ruso de Cooperación
Internacional Cultural y Científica
Caracas
VENEZUELA
Tel.: (58 2) 753 4057
Fax: (58 2) 753 4057
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr Agustin IRIARTE WALTON
Autoridad Administrativa CITES
Servicio Agrícola y Ganadero
Avenida Bulnes 140,
Santiago
CHILE
Tel.: (56 2) 672 1394
Fax: (56 2) 699 2778
E-mail: [email protected]
 
 
Dr Maurice ISAACS
Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries
P.O. Box N 3028
Nassau
BAHAMAS
Tel.: (242) 325 1173
Fax: (242) 328 5874
E-mail: [email protected]
 
Ms Stéphanie JACQUET-POUILLAUDE
Ministère de l'aménagement du territoire et de l'environnement
Direction de la Nature et des Paysages
Bureau de la Convention de Washington
20, avenue de Ségur
F-75302 Paris 07 SP
FRANCE
Tel.: (33) 1-42 19 19 16
Fax: (33) 1-42 19 19 81
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Dr Dietrich JELDEN
Bundesamt für Naturschutz
Konstantinstr. 110
53179 Bonn
GERMANY
Tel.: (49) 228-9543-0
Fax: (49) 228-9543 470
E-mail: [email protected]
 
Mr Thomas KAVENEY
Environment Australia
GPO Box 636
Canberra, ACT 2601
AUSTRALIA
Tel.: (612) 625 00 313
Fax: (612) 625 00 243
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr Toshiyuku KUBODERA
Office of Ecosystem Conservation
Fisheries Agency
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
1-2-2, Kasumigaseki
Chiyoda-ku
Tokyo 100 - 8907
JAPAN
Tel.: (813) 3502 0736
Fax: (813) 3502 1682
E-mail: [email protected]

Licda. Victoria LICHTSCHEIN
Dirección de Fauna y Flora Silvestres
San Martín 459 - 3° piso
1004 Buenos Aires
ARGENTINA
Tel.: (541) 348 8551
Fax: (541) 348 8554; 348 8602
 
Mr Emile MAMFOUMBI KOMBILA
Directeur de la Faune et de la Chasse
B.P. 1128 Libreville
GABON
Tel.: (241) 76 14 44
Fax: (241) 76 10 73; 76 61 83
E-mail: -
 
Lic. Luis MARRERO
Ministerio de Agricultura y Cría
Servicio Autónomo de los Recursos Pesqueros
y Acuicolas (SARPA)
División de Fomento Pesquero
Torre Este, piso 10
Parque Central
Caracas 1010
VENEZUELA
Tel: (58 2) 509 0397; 509 0383
Fax: (58 2) 574 3587
E-mail:[email protected]
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Ms Aleyda Esmeralda MARTINEZ-PARRA
Instituto de Investigación de Recursos
Biológicos "Alexander Von Humbold"
Autoridad Científica CITES
Calle 37 No. 8-40, Mezzanine
Santafé de Bogotá, D.C.
COLOMBIA
Tel.: (571) 338 3900
Fax: (571) 288 9564
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr Hiroaki MATSUNAGA
Tuna Fisheries Section
Japan National Research Institute of
Far Seas Fisheries
5-7-1 Orido
Shimizu 424
JAPAN
Tel.: (81) 543-36 6000

Fax: (81) 543 35 9642
E-mail: [email protected]
 
 
Mr Obed MBANGWA
Wildlife Division
Ministry of Natural Resources and Tourism
Ivory Room
Nyerere Road, P.O. Box 1994
Dar-es-Salaam
UNITED REPUBLIC OF TANZANIA
Tel.: (25551) 866 408
Fax: (25551) 863 496
E-mail: [email protected]
 
Mr Xianlin MENG
The People's Republic of China Endangered
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora Import and
Export Administrative Office
Ministry of Forestry
Hepingli
Beijing 100714
CHINA
Tel.: (8610) 642 14 180
Fax: (8610) 642 14 180
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Licda. Begoña MORA
Ministerio del Ambiente y de los Recursos
Naturales Renovables (MARNR)
Servicio Autónomo PROFAUNA - MARNR
Centro Simón Bolívar
Edificio Camejo (frente al Pasaje Zingg)
Entrada Oeste; Nivel Mezzanina
Caracas 1010
VENEZUELA
Tel: (582) 545 4257 ; 508 1514
Fax: (582) 545 4257
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Ms Elisabetta MORGANTE
Corpo Forestale dello Stato - Servizio CITES
Via G. Carducci, 5E
00187 Roma
ITALY
Tel.: (39) 6-466 57 225
Fax: (39) 6-489 05 507
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Licda. Betzabey MOTTA
Ministerio del Ambiente y de los Recursos
Naturales Renovables (MARNR)
Servicio Autónomo PROFAUNA - MARNR
Centro Simón Bolívar
Edificio Camejo (frente al Pasaje Zingg)
Entrada Oeste; Nivel Mezzanina
Caracas 1010
VENEZUELA
Tel: (582) 545 4257 ; 508 1514
Fax: (582) 545 4257
E-mail: [email protected]

Mr Dominique NGONGBA-NGOUADAKPA
Ministère de l'environnement, des eaux,
forêts, chasse et pêche
B.P. 830
Bangui
REPUBLIQUE CENTRAFRICAINE
Tel.: (236) 61 49 39
Fax: (236) 61 57 41
E-mail: -
 
Mr Nicaise NGOUPANDE
Ministère de l'environnement, des eaux,
forêts, chasse et pêche
B.P. 830
Bangui
REPUBLIQUE CENTRAFRICAINE
Tel.: (236) 61 49 39
Fax: (236) 61 57 41
E-mail: -
Mr Adrien NOUNGOU
Chef de service de l'Aménagement de la faune
B.P. 1128
Libreville
GABON
Tel.: (241) 76 14 44
Fax: (241) 76 10 73; 76 61 83
E-mail: -
 
Mr Atsushi OKUMA
Office of Ecosystem Conservation, Fishery Agency
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
1-2-1, Kasumigaseki
Chiyoda-ku
Tokyo 100
JAPAN
Tel.: (813) 3502 0736
Fax: (813) 3502 1682
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr José Juan PEREZ RAMIREZ
Instituto Nacional de Ecología
Dirección General de Vida Silvestre
Av. Revolución No. 1425, Nivel 20
Col. Tlacopac
Deleg. Alvaro Obregón
01040 - Mexico, D.F.
MEXICO
Tel.: (525) 624 33 15
Fax: (525) 624 35 88
E-mail: jjpé[email protected]

 
Mr Jorge PICON
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Office of the Management Authority
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1 305) 526 2789
Fax: (1 305) 526 2695
E-mail: [email protected]
 
 
Ms Eleanor PHILLIPS
Department of Fisheries
Ministry of Agriculture & Fisheries
P.O. Box N 3028
Nassau
BAHAMAS
Tel.: (242) 393 1777
Fax: (242) 393 2751
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Ms Gabriela PINEDA
Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería
Dirección General de Pesca
Departamento de Investigación y Tecnología
Boulevard Miraflores, Avenida La FAO
Tegucigalpa
HONDURAS
Tel.: (504) 232 4054; 232 8600
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Ms Magaly M. OJEDA C.
Ministerio del Ambiente y de los Recursos
Naturales Renovables (MARNR)
Servicio Autónomo PROFAUNA - MARNR
Centro Simón Bolívar
Edificio Camejo (frente al Pasaje Zingg)
Entrada Oeste; Nivel Mezzanina
Caracas 1010
VENEZUELA
Tel: (582) 545 4257 ; 508 1514
Fax: (582) 545 4257
E-mail: [email protected]
 
Mr Jacques RIGOULET
Museum National d'Histoire Naturelle
Ménagerie du Jardin des Plantes
57, rue Cuvier
75231 Paris Cedex 05
FRANCE
Tel.: (33) 1-40 79 48 31
Fax: (33) 1-40 79 38 16
E-mail: [email protected]

Dra. Dalia SALABARRIA FERNANDEZ
Specialist Centre of Management and
Environmental Inspection
20 Calle No. 4110, esq. 18A Playa
Ciudad de La Habana
REPUBLICA DE CUBA
Tel.: (537) 227 573; 229 351
Fax: (537) 249 081; 240 798
E-mail: [email protected]
 
Mr José Luis SALAZAR
Autoridad Científica CITES
Ministerio de Agricultura y Ganadería
Centro de Desarrollo Pesquero
Final 1a. Avenida Norte
Nueva San Salvador
EL SALVADOR
Tel.: (503) 228 1066
Fax: (503) 228 0039
E-mail: [email protected]
 
Ms Gloria SANTANA ZORRILLA
Secretaría Estado Agricultura
Depto. Vida Silvestre
Avenida John F. Kennedy, Urb.
Jardínes del Norte
Apto Postal 1472
Santo Domingo
DOMINICAN REPUBLIC
Tel.: (1 809) 227 6550
Fax: (1 809) 227 6550
E-mail: [email protected]
 
Dr Juan Sierra A.
Ministerio del Ambiente y de los Recursos
Naturales Renovables (MARNR)
Servicio Autónomo PROFAUNA - MARNR
Centro Simón Bolívar
Edificio Camejo (frente al Pasaje Zingg)
Entrada Oeste; Nivel Mezzanina
Caracas 1010
VENEZUELA
Tel: (582) 545 4257 ; 508 1514
Fax: (582) 545 4257
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr James SINGH
Environmental Protection Agency
Centre for the Study of Biological Diversity
8 First Street
Industry Housing Scheme
East Coast Demerara
Georgetown
GUYANA
Tel.: ( ) 022 4523
Fax:
E-mail:
Mr Efraín SISO T.
Ministerio del Ambiente y de los Recursos
Naturales Renovables (MARNR)
Servicio Autónomo PROFAUNA - MARNR
Centro Simón Bolívar
Edificio Camejo (frente al Pasaje Zingg)
Entrada Oeste; Nivel Mezzanina
Caracas 1010 / VENEZUELA
Tel: (582) 545 4257 ; 508 1514
Fax: (582) 545 4257
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Ms Edis SOLORZANO
Ministerio del Ambiente y de los Recursos
Naturales Renovables (MARNR)
Servicio Autónomo PROFAUNA - MARNR
Centro Simón Bolívar
Edificio Camejo (frente al Pasaje Zingg)
Entrada Oeste; Nivel Mezzanina
Caracas 1010
VENEZUELA
Tel: (582) 545 4257 ; 508 1514
Fax: (582) 545 4257
E-mail: [email protected]

Mr Petr SVEC
Ministry of the Environment
Vrsovicka 65
Praha 10
CZECH REPUBLIC
Tel.: (4202) 6712 24 50
Fax: (4202) 6731 10 96
E-mail: [email protected]
Mr Charif TALA
Servicio Agrícola y Ganadero
Autoridad Administrativa CITES
Avenida General Bulnes No. 140
Santiago
CHILE
Tel.: (56 2) 672 1394
Fax: (56 2) 699 2778
E-mail: [email protected]
 
 
Mr Sung WANG
Endangered Species Scientific Commission, PRC
19 Zhongguancun Lu, Haidian
Beijing100080
CHINA
Tel.: (8610) 6264 7675; 6256 4680
Fax: (8619) 6264 7675; 6256 2717
E-mail: [email protected]
E-mail: [email protected]

Mr Vladimir ZODOROZHNY
Segundo Secretario
Embassy of the Russian Federation
Caracas
VENEZUELA
Tel.: (58 2) 993 4395; 993 4531
Fax: (58 2) 993 6526
 
 
 
 
 

Observers (United Nations/International Organizations)

Mr Alberto ABREU GROBOIS
SSC/IUCN
Instituto de Ciencias del Mar y Limnología
Apartado Postal 811
Mazatlán, Sinaloa
MEXICO 82000
Tel.: (52 69) 852 846
Fax: (52 69) 826 133
E-mail: [email protected]
 
Mr Norman BELLINO
Representative of Food and Agriculture
Organization of the United Nations (FAO)
Torre Este, Piso 10
Parque Central
Caracas 1010
VENEZUELA
Tel.: (58 2) 509 0322; 509 0350
Fax: ((58 2) 577 5012
E-mail: [email protected]

Mr David MORGAN
European Commission
Rue de la Loi 200 (TRMF 02/70)
B-1049 Bruxelles
BELGIUM
Tel.: (32) 2-296 87 12
Fax: (32) 2-296 95 56
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Ms Alison ROSSER
IUCN/SSC Wildlife Trade Programme
219c Huntingdon Rd.
Cambridge
UNITED KINGDOM, CB3 0DL
Tel.: (44) 1223-277 966
Fax: (44) 1223-277 845
E-mail: [email protected]

Observers (Non-Governmental Organizations)

Ms Lucy ALIO
Asociación Pro Defensa de los Animales (APROA)
Calle Aranda, quinta Sarín
Los Chaguaramos
Caracas
VENEZUELA
Tel.: (582) 782 41 82
Fax: (582) 793 44 21
E-mail: -
 
Mr Diego AMOROCHO
Fundación FES
Calle 64 Nte N° 5b-146 L26
Cali
COLOMBIA
Tel.: (572) 666 1700
Fax: (572) 665 4300
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Ms Betty M. BAQUERO de PEDRET
ZOOCONSULT
Urb. Trigal Norte, Avenida Autocinema
Res. Trigal Country, Edf. 1, Apto. 1-24
Valencia, Edo. de Carabobo
VENEZUELA
Tel.: (58 41) 430 806

Fax: (58 41) 430 654
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr Jaques BERNEY
IWMC World Conservation Trust
3, passage de Montriond
CH-1006 Lausanne
SWITZERLAND
Tel.: (41) 21-616 50 00/01
Fax: (41) 21-616 50 00
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Ms Cecilia BLOHM
Fundopecuario Masaguaral
Corozo Pando, Estado Guarico
VENEZUELA
Tel.:
Fax:
E-mail:
 
 
Mr Jared BLUMENFELD
International Fund for Animal Welfare
411 Main Street
Yarmouth Port, MA 02675-1822
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1) 508-362 53 73
Fax: (1) 508-362 54 73
E-mail: [email protected]
 
Mr Frank M. BOND
North American Falconers Association
P.O. Box 4160
Santa Fe, New Mexico 87502-4160
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1) 505-988 4476
Fax: (1) 505-984 9937
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr David BOWLES
Royal Society for the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals
C/o Wildlife Department
Causeway
Horsham, West Sussex RH12 1HG
UNITED KINGDOM
Tel.: (44) 1403-264 181
Fax: (44) 1403-241 048
E-mail: [email protected]
Mr Koen BROUWER
European Association of Zoos and Aquaria
C/o Amsterdam Zoo
P.O. Box 20164
1000 HD Amsterdam
THE NETHERLANDS
Tel.: (31) 20 622 49 34
Fax: (31) 20 625 3571
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr Donald BRUNING
Chairman and Curator
Wildlife Conservation Society
185th Street and Southern Boulevard
Bronx, New York 10460-1099
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1 718) 220 5159
Fax: (1 718) 733 7300
E-mail: [email protected]
 
Mr Juan Carlos CANTU GUZMAN
Greenpeace Mexico
Ahuehuetes Sur 811
Col. Bosques de as lomas
C.P. 11700
Mexico Distrito Federal
MEXICO
Tel.: (525) 251 60 96
Fax: (525) 251 60 96
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr Javier COLVEE
Audubon de Venezuela
Apartado 80450
1080-A Caracas
VENEZUELA
Tel.: (582) 922 812; 923 268
Fax: (582) 991 0716
E-mail: [email protected]
 
Mr Anthony CROSSWELL
British Falconers Club
Sneath Farm
High Green
Great Moulton
Norwich NR15 2HN
UNITED KINGDOM
Tel.: (44) 1-379 677 296
Fax: (44) 1-379 677 296
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr Christian DE COUNE
The International Association for Falconry
and Conservation of Birds of Prey
Le Cochetay
Their des Forges, 85
B-4140 Gomze-Andoumont
BELGIUM
Tel.: (32) 4-368 40 21
Fax: (32) 4-368 40 15
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr Manuel DENIS
ASOBABA
Torre Phelps, piso 14
Plaza Venezuela
Caracas
Venezuela
Tel.: (58 2) 793 3111
Fax: (58 2) 793 0572
E-mail:
 
 
Mr Diego DIAZ-MARTIN
FUDENA
Centro Empresarial Senderos
Piso 6 Ofiura
611 - Avenida Principal Los Cortisas de Lourdes
Caracas
VENEZUELA
Tel.: (582) 239 65 47
Fax: (582) 239 21 39
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr Carlos DREWS
Regional Wildlife Management Program
National University of Costa Rica - UNA
Apartado 1350
3000 Heredia
COSTA RICA
Tel.: (506) 277 3600
Fax: (506) 237 7036
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr Kuo-Yun FANG
SWAN International
37 Nanhai Rd.
Taipei
Taiwan
CHINA
Tel.: (8862) 2312 5875
Fax: (8862) 2312 0337
E-mail:
 
Mr Juan Carlos FERNANDEZ DOLDAN
Fundación Científica Los Roques
Apartado Postal N° 1139
Carmelitas
Caracas 1010-A
Tel.: (58 2) 263 9729
Fax: (58 2) 261 3461
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Ms Joan GALVIN
Center for Elephant Conservation
c/o Feld Entertainment, Inc.
8607 Westwood Center Drive
Vienna, VA 22182
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1) 703-749 5547
Fax: (1) 703-448 4034
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Ms Andrea GASKI
TRAFFIC North America
1250 24th St., NW
Washington, D.C. 20037
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1) 202-293-4800
Fax: (1) 202-775 82 87
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Dr Jonathan H.W. GIPPS
Zoological Society of London
London Zoo
Regent's Park
London NW1 4RY
UNITED KINGDOM
Tel.: (44) 171-449 6500
Fax: (44) 171 586 5743
E-mail:
 
Mr Eduardo GONZALEZ JIMENEZ
CONOCIT
Gerencia de Investigación Orientada
Av. Principal de los Cortijos de Lourdes
Edif. Maploca I, Piso 4
Caracas
VENEZUELA
Tel.: (58 2) 239 766
Fax: (58 2) 239 3145
E-mail:
 
Mr Hedelvy GUADA
Wider Caribbean Sea Turtle Conservation
Network, WIDECAST
Apdo. 50.789
Caracas 1050-A
VENEZUELA
Tel.: (582) 761 0680
Fax: (582) 762 84 85
E-mail: 95-79050 usb.ve
 
Mr Omar HERNANDEZ
FUDECI
Palacio de las Academias
Edificio Anexo, Piso 2
Avenida Universidad
Bolsa a San Francisco
Apartado Postal 185
Caracas 1010-A
VENEZUELA
Tel.: (58 2) 484 6377
Fax: (58 2) 484 1310; 484 6611
E-mail: [email protected]

Mr Miguel IÑIGUEZ
Fundación CETHUS
P.O. Box 4490
1001 Buenos Aires
ARGENTINA
Tel.: (541) 799 36 98
Fax: (541) 823 97 39
E-mail: [email protected]

Dr Nobuo ISHII
Japan Wildlife Research Center
Yushima 2-29-3, Bunkyo-ku
Tokyo
JAPAN 113-0034
Tel.: (813) 3813 8897
Fax: (813) 3813 8898
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr John J. JACKSON, III
The International Foundation for the
Conservation of Wildlife
Suite 1045, 3900 N. Causeway Blvd.
Metairie, Louisiana 70002
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1) 504-837 1233
Fax: (1) 504-837 1145
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr Ricky N. JORDAN
American Federation of Aviculture Inc.
111 Barton Bend
Dripping Springs, TX 78620
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1) 512-858 70 29
Fax: (1) 512 858 7029
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr Yoshio KANEKO
Global Guardian Trust
Toranomon 3-7-5
Minato-ku
Tokyo 105
JAPAN
Tel.: (81) 3-3459 5447
Fax: (81) 3-3459 5449
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr César LODEIROS
Instituto Oceanográfico de Venezuela
Apartado de Correos 245
Cumaná
VENEZUELA
Tel.: (58 93) 315 902
Fax: (58 93) 512 276
E-mail: [email protected]

Dr Barbara MAAS
Tusk Force
11 Sheldon Rd, Edmonton
London, N18 1RQ
UNITED KINGDOM
Tel.: (44) 181-245 4126
Fax: (44) 181-245 4126
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr Joseph V. MASIN
Electronic Identification Devices, Ltd.,
Manufacturer & Scientific Consultant
2535 Sycamore Canyon Road
Santa Barbara, California 93108
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel: (1) 805-969 6860
Fax: (1) 805-969 1542
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr Marshall MEYERS
Pet Industry Joint Advisory Council
1220 19th St. NW
Washington, D.C.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1) 202-466 82 70
Fax: (1) 202-293 43 77
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Ms Ann MICHELS
Animal Welfare Institute
P.O. Box 3650
Washington, D.C. 20007
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1) 202-337 2332
Fax: (1) 202-338 9478
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr Dick MONROE
Darden Environmental Trust
P.O. Box 593330
Orlando, FL 32859-3330
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1) 407-245 5272
Fax: (1) 407-245 5135
E-mail: RPBWR,[email protected]
 
Ms Miriam MONTERROSO-HELWIG
ARCAS
1a. calle 50-37, Zona 11
Colonia Molino de Las Floras
Guatemala City
GUATEMALA
Tel.: (502) 591 4731
Fax: (502) 591 4731
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Ms Teresa MULLIKEN
TRAFFIC International
219 c Huntingdon Rd.
Cambridge CB3 0DL
UNITED KINGDOM
Tel.: (44) 1-223-277 427
Fax: (44) 1-223-277 237
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Ms Kate O'CONNELL
Whale & Dolphin Conservation Society (WDCS)
35 Somerset St.
West Hartford, CT 06110
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1) 860-521 85 36
Fax: (1) 860-521 82 68
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Ms Andy OLIVER
World Wildlife Fund US
1250 24th St. NW
Washington, D.C. 20037
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1) 202-778 9627
Fax: (1) 202-887 5293
E-mail: [email protected]
 
Dr Ronald ORENSTEIN
International Wildlife Coalition
1825 Shady Creek Court

Missisauga, Ontario
CANADA
Tel.: (1) 905 820 7886
Fax: (1) 905 569 0116
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr Richard PARSONS
International Wildlife Conservation Consultants
455 Carlisle Drive
Herndon, Va 22070
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1) 703-709 2293
Fax: (1) 703-709 2296
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Dr Kurtis PEI
National Pingtung University of Science
and Technology
Dept. of Wildlife conservation
Neipu, Pingtung, Taiwan
CHINA
Tel.: (886 8) 774 0285
Fax: (886 8) 774 0284
E-mail: [email protected]
 
Mr Robert PORTER
Born Free Foundation
60, Seymour Avenue
Bristol
BS7 9HN
United Kingdom
Tel.: (44 171) 667 5160
Fax: (44 171) 667 5100
E-mail: [email protected]
Mr Alvaro POSADA-SALAZAR
Humane Society International-H
Calle 94 No. 15-19, Ofic. 304
Bogota
COLOMBIA
Tel.: (571) 256 88 06
Fax: (571) 256 87 94
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Ms Laura REIFSCHNEIDER
Ringling Bros.
C/o Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld, L.L.P.
1333 New Hampshire Avenue, N.W. - Suite 400
Washington, D.C. 20036
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1) 202-887 4127
Fax: (1) 202-887 42 88
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr Federico RIVERA ESPINA
ADPROCA
Avenida Francisco Miranda
Torre Delta P.H.
Altamira
Caracas
VENEZUELA
Tel.: (58 2) 263 2922
Fax: (58 2) 263 4960
E-mail:
 
Mr Adam ROBERTS
Society for Animal Protective Legislation
P.O. Box 3719
Georgetown Station
Washington, D.C. 20007
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1) 202-337 2334
Fax: (1) 202-338 9478
E-mail: [email protected].com
 
Ms Clemencia RODNER
Audubon de Venezuela
Apartado 80450
Caracas
VENEZUELA
Tel.: (582) 922 812
Fax: (582) 991 0716
E-mail: [email protected]

Mr Franklin ROJAS SUAREZ
PROVITA
Edificio Catuche
Nivel Oficina 1, Ofic. 105 y 106
Parque Central
Caracas
VENEZUELA
Tel.: (582) 576 28 28
Fax: (582) 576 15 79
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Ms Glevys RONDON
International Fund for Animal Welfare-UK
Warren Court
Park Road
Crowborough, East Sussex
UNITED KINGDOM, TN6 2GA
Tel.: (44) 1892-601 900
Fax: (44) 1892-601 926
E-mail: -
 
Mr J. Perran ROSS
Crocodile Specialist Group/SSC
Florida Museum Natural History
Box 117800
University of Florida
Gainesville; FL 32611
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1) 352-846 2566
Fax: (1) 352 392 9367
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Ms Cristina A. SILVERA
Fundación Museo de Ciencias
Plaza de los Museos
Parque los Caobos
Caracas
VENEZUELA
Tel.: (58 2) 577 0232
Fax: (58 2) 571 1265
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Ms Lesley Ann SUTTY
Eastern Caribbean Coalition for
Environmental Awareness (ECCEA)
Anse Latouche
Le Carbet 97221
MARTINIQUE, French West Indies
Tel.: (596) 7810 94
Fax: (596) 7810 94
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr Bruce TAUBERT
International Association of Fish and
Wildlife Agencies
Arizona Game and Fish Department
2221 West Greenway Road
Phoenix, Arizona 85023
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1) 602-789 3301
Fax: (1) 602-789 3920
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Dr Teresa TELECKY
Humane Society of the United States
2100 L Street NW
Washington, D.C. 20037
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1) 301-258 3142
Fax: (1) 301-258 3080
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Ms Kristin VEHRS
American Zoo and Aquarium Association
7970 D Old Georgetown Rd
Bethesda, Maryland 20814
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1 301) 907 7777
Fax: (1 301) 907 2980
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr Juan VILLALBA-MACIAS
World Conservation Trust Foundation
Edificio Palacio Central
Av. Libertador 1623/1204
11100 Montevideo
URUGUAY
Tel.: (598 2) 901 5052
Fax: (598 2) 901 5052
E-mail: -
Ms Susie WATTS
David Shepherd Conservation Foundation
61 Smithbrook Kilns
Cranleigh
Surrey GU6 8JJ
UNITED KINGDOM
Tel.: (44) 1483-272 323
Fax: (44) 1483-272 427
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Dr Grahame WEBB
Wildlife Management International
P.O. Box 530
Sanderson, N.T. 0812
AUSTRALIA
Tel.: (61) 8-8999 2355
Fax: (61) 8-8947 0678
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr David WILLS
The PEAT Institute
429 New Jersey Ave SE
Washington, D. C. 2000 3
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1) 202-544 9748
Fax: (1) 202 544 9749
E-mail: [email protected]
 
Mr Roland WITSCHEL
Care for the Wild Deutschland e.v.
Landauer Str. 57/A
70499 Stuttgart
GERMANY
Tel.: (49) 711-838 6715
Fax: (49) 711-838 6719
E-mail: -
 

CITES Secretariat

 
Dr James ARMSTRONG
Deputy Secretary General
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr Jonathan BARZDO
Head
Convention Interpretation and Servicing Unit
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr John KUNDAELI
Quota Officer
E-mail: [email protected]

Dr Obdulio MENGHI
Scientific Co-ordinator
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mrs Maritza de CAMPOS
Assistant to the Scientific Co-ordinator
E-mail: [email protected]

 
CITES Secretariat
15, chemin des anémones
CH-1219 Châtelaine-Genève
SWITZERLAND
Tel.: (41) 22-917 81 39
Fax: (41) 22-797 34 17
 
 
 

Rapporteurs

 
Mr Roddy GABEL
US Fish and Wildlife Service
Office of Scientific Authority
4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Room 750
Arlington, VA 22203
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Tel.: (1703) 358 1708
Fax: (1703) 358 2202
E-mail:
 
 
Ms Alison LITTLEWOOD
Joint Nature Conservation Committee
Monkstone House
City Road
Peterborough, PE1 1 JY
UNITED KINGDOM
Tel.: (44) 1733- 866 814
Fax: (44) 1733- 555 948
E-mail: [email protected]

 
Mr Thomas KAVENEY
Environment Australia
GPO Box 636
Canberra, ACT 2601
AUSTRALIA
Tel.: (612) 625 00 313
Fax: (612) 625 00 243
E-mail: [email protected].