CoP17 Prop. 3

Amend the Appendix-II listing for Vicugna vicugna
For the exclusive purpose of allowing international trade in wool sheared from live vicuñas
and in items made thereof, the following provisions shall apply:- In addition to obtaining the CITES permit, any person or entity making products fromvicuña wool must have a licence to use the country of origin mark. There are twomarks:- For international trade in garments and cloth made from vicuña wool sheared fromlive animals, whether made inside or outside the country of origin, the “VICUÑA[country of origin]” mark must be used:

For cloth, the selvages must bear the words “VICUÑA [country of origin]” or products madeoutside the country of origin, the name of the country where the product was processed or thegarment was made must also be indicated.
- For international trade in handicrafts (artisanal processing) made in the country oforigin from wool sheared from live vicuñas, the “VICUÑA [country of origin] –ARTESANÍA” mark must be used.

If processing takes place outside the country of origin, the name of the country where theproduct was processed or the garment was made must also be indicated.
- If articles are made from vicuña wool from several countries of origin, the countries
from which the wool was obtained must be indicated, along with the percentage ofwool from each country contained in the product.
- All other specimens shall be deemed to be specimens of species listed in Appendix I
and the trade in them shall be regulated accordingly.

Proponent: Peru
Summary: The current Appending-II listing for Vicuña is annotated as follows:“Vicugna vicugna [Only the populations of Argentina1 (the populations of the Provinces ofJujuy and Catamarca and the semi-captive populations of the Provinces of Jujuy, Salta,Catamarca, La Rioja and San Juan), Chile2 (population of the Primera Región), Ecuador3 (thewhole population), Peru4 (the whole population) and the Plurinational State of Bolivia5 (thewhole population); all other populations are included in Appendix I]”
Each population has its own annotation, indicated by the numbered superscripts above, specifying theparts, purposes and labelling to be adhered to for that population. Current annotations vary
marginally, allowing trade in wool sheared from live Vicuñas and items thereof under the condition
that any cloth is marked with logo and indication of country of origin and that other items are labelled
as artisanal products from the country of origin.
It appears that the proposed amendment is intended to replace all the current annotations 1-5 with asingle annotation that would result in the following:-For international trade in cloth or garments [from live Vicuña] processed within or outside thecountry of origin, the product must be marked with the logo and the indication of country oforigin on the selvadge (edge of woven fabric finished so as to prevent unravelling, often in anarrow tape effect, different from the body of the fabric).

-

Where processing has taken place outside the country of origin, a label must indicate thecountry where the transformation took place or the garment was made.
1

CoP17 Prop. 3-

For artisanal products, where these are produced outside the country of origin, as well as thelabel specifying “Vicuña [country of origin] – artisanal”, a label must indicate the country
where the transformation took place or the garment was made.

-Where the product is made of wool from more than one country, it should indicate all thosecountries and the percentage of wool from each.

Currently, exported wool does not have to be marked; once processed outside countries of origin
there is no labelling requirement for cloth or garments produced. It also appears that garments madefrom labelled cloth do not necessarily have to be labelled with the logo and the country of origin.
Analysis: Under the proposal, all items processed outside the country of origin would be expected tocarry the above labels. This presumably applies both to those sold in the processing country andthose re-exported. It is not clear that it is possible to enforce under the Convention a requirement thatproducts for a domestic market be labelled in a particular way. It may in theory be possible to apply alabelling restriction to re-exports, essentially as a mechanism for ensuring that wool used was legallyobtained in the first place (Under Article IV of the Convention (specifically paragraph 5 a) re-export ofany product from a species included in Appendix II requires a re-export certificate which theManagement Authority of the re-exporting State should only grant if they are satisfied that thespecimen was imported into that State in accordance with the provisions of the Convention). There isan analogy with labelling of crocodilian skins, (Res. Conf. 11.12 (Rev. CoP15): Universal tagging
system for the identification of crocodilian skins), although the latter contains recommendations rather
than prescriptions for allowing trade.
Replacing the five separate annotations would remove any differences between the current
annotations.

2