https://www.cites.org/eng/news...cites-cop18_04012019

PRESS RELEASE

Proposals to change protection levels of species under international trade
at the next World Wildlife Conference available online
Marine and timber species top on the agenda. International trade in African elephant, giraffe,
white rhino, saiga antelope, vicuna and many other species also to be addressed
at CITES CoP18 in May 2019 in Colombo, Sri Lanka

Geneva, 4 January 2019 – 57 proposals to amend the lists of species subject to CITES regulations were submitted by 90 countries for consideration at the next World Wildlife Conference - the 18th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES #CoP18), to be held from 23 May to 3 June 2019 in Colombo, Sri Lanka. In addition, a record 140 documents proposing new measures and policies on international trade in wild fauna and flora were submitted for consideration by the Conference.

The proposals to amend the lists of species (i.e. the CITES Appendices) and other documents will be decided upon at the triennial meeting of the 183 Parties to CITES (i.e. 182 countries and the European Union). The proposals are now available on the CITES website in the languages and formats in which they were received. Parties have until mid-March 2019 to provide their comments on these proposals. The CITES Secretariat will also invite comments from relevant intergovernmental bodies.

“The stakes are high under CITES and robust debates are to be expected. Decisions taken in Colombo will have a real and immediate effect on the legislation, regulation, and operating practices across the globe for international trade in the species concerned. Decisions taken at CoP18 will also alter their conservation and international trade management, and have direct impacts on biodiversity, livelihoods of rural communities and national economies”, said Secretary-General, Ivonne Higuero.

The 57 listing proposals cover a wide range of species, from mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, fish and insects to a variety of plant species including high value rosewood species. Countries are continuing to use their Convention for ensuring that timber and marine resources are not overexploited by proposing new timber and fishery species for inclusion in the CITES Appendices. For the first time, a proposal has been submitted to include the giraffe, the world's tallest land mammal, under CITES. There is also a proposal to list the mammoth, an extinct species, in CITES Appendix II.

The three proposals on African elephants show the divergence of opinions among range States of this species on how to deal with international trade in elephant products: two aim at easing controls on international trade in African elephant products, and one at prohibiting all commercial trade. While Namibia is proposing to downlist its population of white rhinos to Appendix II, to allow only international commercial trade in live animals and hunting trophies, the proposal from Eswatini seeks to allow unrestricted international commercial trade in all specimens of its white rhino population, which is currently included in Appendix II.

CITES is a legally binding agreement which aims to ensure that international trade in specimens of wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival. It does so by monitoring, listing and regulating legal and sustainable wildlife trade and by combating illegal trade in wildlife. It currently regulates trade in over 36,000 species of wild animals and plants.

CITES determines international rules governing trade in wildlife. Governments will consider and accept, reject or adjust these proposals for amending the CITES Appendices at CoP18. Unlike most other international agreements, CITES Parties decide by vote where consensus is not possible, with a two thirds majority required.

CITES Secretary-General Ivonne Higuero recently paid a visit to Sri Lanka, the CoP18 host country, to discuss preparations for CoP18, where she met His Excellency John A. E. Amaratunga, Minister of Wildlife, Tourism and Christian Religious Affairs.

"I was encouraged by the commitment at the highest levels of decision makers to ensure that the necessary steps will be taken in the next days so that preparations are on track for the next World Wildlife Conference – CITES CoP18. We look forward to facilitating the optimal setting for these discussions for the 183 Parties to CITES, the observers from intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations and the private sector, as well as representatives from rural communities in Colombo in 2019," added Higuero.

Other documents (known as “working documents”) as well as the Secretariat's assessment of the proposals to amend Appendices I and II, will be published on the CITES website at a later stage.

Note to editors: For more information and to arrange interviews, please contact Liu Yuan at +41 22 917 8130 or yuan.liu@cites.org

About CITES

With 183 Parties, Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) remains one of the world's most powerful tools for wildlife conservation through the regulation of trade. Thousands of species are internationally traded and used by people in their daily lives for food, health care, housing, tourist souvenirs, cosmetics or fashion.

CITES regulates international trade in over 36,000 species of plants and animals, including their products and derivatives, to ensure their survival in the wild with benefits for the livelihoods of local people and the global environment. The CITES permit system seeks to ensure that international trade in listed species is sustainable, legal and traceable.

CITES was signed in Washington D.C. on 3 March 1973 and entered into force on 1 July 1975. Learn more about CITES by visiting www.cites.org or connecting to:

www.facebook.com/CITES
www.flickr.com/CITES
www.twitter.com/CITES
www.youtube.com/c/CITES

https://cites.org/eng/cop/18/prop/index.php


Link to the proposals.

It does not matter what CITES decides, stupid politicians in the West think they know better!

Cites decisions are often flawed. Votes are often bought by ngos.

Dave

Am I reading the proposals right that it has been proposed to down list Namibia, Botswana, and South African elephants to Appendix I.

If that is correct it should be celebrated and shouted from the roof tops.

They want to add the woolly mammoth (Mammuthus primigenius) to Appendix II. An extinct species. I am not making that up.

I would have thought that a bit too late.

Why not add the Tyrannosaurus Rex as well?

I see extinct species mammalian discrimination here.

quote:

Why not add the Tyrannosaurus Rex as well?

Not extinct - Saeed has one, alive and well and numerous victims whom have felt its strength and mighty roar.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
It does not matter what CITES decides, stupid politicians in the West think they know better!

Sadly you are correct.

I suspect the reason for adding mammoth is due to the more or less unregulated trades in mammoth ivory.

Someone probably is wanting this for the same reason southern white rhino were put on... it will supposedly protect elephant because it’s “too easy” to call it mammoth ivory, which is unregulated internationally, so it protects another protected species.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
I suspect the reason for adding mammoth is due to the more or less unregulated trades in mammoth ivory.

Someone probably is wanting this for the same reason southern white rhino were put on... it will supposedly protect elephant because it’s “too easy” to call it mammoth ivory, which is unregulated internationally, so it protects another protected species.

But that argument is hard to fathom.

It is a mystery to me how commercial poachers could successfully trade elephant ivory on the international black market as mammoth ivory.

They'd still have to smuggle it. No one would be fooled by a claim that a ship outbound from east Africa to Vietnam was full of "mammoth ivory."

To me, it's just another "let's ban it" overreach.

What's next, Mastodons?

I agree that it’s overreach, but it is within their precedent.

Overreach is not good precedent.

(1) CITES is not legally-binding, and (2) the definitive bottom line is the IUCN Re List.

https://www.apnews.com/d8fe0ee...499e9381326f10bf7ce6



Africa is divided over ivory trade ahead of wildlife meeting

By CHRISTOPHER TORCHIA
yesterday


JOHANNESBURG (AP) — Several African countries with some of the world’s largest elephant populations will push this year for looser controls on legal ivory trade, while another group of countries on the continent says more restrictions are the best way to curb the illegal killing of elephants for their tusks.

The dueling proposals reflect divisions within Africa over how to safeguard a species that has been killed in massive numbers by poachers over the past decade and to what extent elephant parts, including ivory, skin and hair, can be sustainably traded as commodities. They pit southern African countries including Botswana and Zimbabwe that say commerce will help them pay to conserve elephants against Kenya, Gabon and others that believe even limited trade fuels demand and drives up illegal killing.


The proposals were released by the office of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, or CITES. They will be discussed when member countries of CITES meet May 23-June 3 in Colombo, Sri Lanka. At the last meeting in Johannesburg in 2016, CITES rejected appeals to relax an international ban on the ivory trade that has been in place for decades.

“There isn’t really any appetite in the international community to agree to this,” said Colman O’Criodain, a wildlife trade expert with the WWF conservation group. He said in a telephone interview with The Associated Press on Saturday that the Sri Lanka meeting should focus on enforcing anti-trafficking measures instead of engaging in “sterile debates” about whether to trade legally.

An illegal ivory market in Vietnam and other countries is feeding demand in China, which banned its domestic ivory trade, according to O’Criodain. Meanwhile, the main exit points for African ivory from the continent are the Kenyan port of Mombasa, the Tanzanian region of Zanzibar and to a lesser extent Maputo, Mozambique’s seaside capital, he said.

A southern African proposal said Botswana, Namibia, Zimbabwe and South Africa have about 256,000 elephants, or more than half of the total estimate for Africa. Protecting elephants as human populations increase and wildlife habitats shrink comes at a big cost, and a closely regulated trade in government-owned stocks of ivory will help to alleviate the burden, it said.

“CITES has acted as an inhibitor and not an enabler of progress,” the proposal said.


Zambia made a similar proposal, saying elephants are competing with people in rural areas for resources and that Zambians would be more tolerant if they see “economic returns earned from the sustainable use of elephant.”

The debate touches on sovereignty issues. Countries that want southern Africa’s elephants to be subject to tighter controls include Gabon, whose forest elephants have been heavily poached, and Nigeria, which has a very small number left. The southern African countries believe countries with their own problems, including weak law enforcement, shouldn’t impose policy on others.

Writing in Zimbabwe’s The Herald, columnist Emmanuel Koro said it was time for southern African countries to act in their “national interests” and consider refusing to go along with CITES-supported bans on the trade in ivory as well as rhino horn. Japan’s recent decision to leave the International Whaling Commission could serve as a guide, he suggested.

O’Criodain, the WWF specialist, cautioned against countries taking the view that “it’s their right to trade and that the consequences are other people’s problems.”

___

Follow Christopher Torchia on Twitter at www.twitter.com/torchiachris