ARCHIVES HISTORIQUES 
DE LA COMMISSION 
 
 
 
COLLECTION RELIEE DES 
DOCUMENTS "COM" 
 
 
 
 
COM (85) 152 
 
 
 
Vol. 1985/0 049 
  
 
Disclaimer  
Conformém ent au règlement (CEE, Euratom) n° 354/83 du Conseil du 1er février 1983 
concernant l'ouverture au public des archives historiques de la Communauté économique 
européenne et de la Communauté européenne de l'énergie atomique (JO L 43 du 15.2.1983, 
p. 1), tel que modifié par le règlement (CE, Euratom) n° 1700/2003 du 22 septembre 2003 
(JO L 243 du 27.9.2003, p. 1), ce dossier est ouvert au public. Le cas échéant, les documents 
classifiés présents dans ce dossier ont été déclassifiés conformément à l'article 5 dudit 
règlem ent. 
In accordance with Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 354/83 of 1 February 1983 
concerning the openi ng to the public of the historical archives of the European Econom ic 
Community and the European Atomic Energy Communit y (OJ L 43, 15.2.1983, p. 1), as 
amended by Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1700/2003 of 22 September 2003 (OJ L 243, 
27.9.2003, p. 1), this f ile is open to the public. Where necessary, classified documents in this 
file have been declassified in conformity with Article 5 of the aforementioned regulation.  
In Übereinstimmung mit der Verordnung (EWG, Euratom) Nr. 354/83 des Rates vom  1. 
Februar 198 3 über die Freigabe der historischen Archive der Europäischen  
Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft und der Europäischen Atomgem einschaft (ABI. L 43 vom  15.2.1983,  
S. 1), geändert durch die Verordnung (EG, Euratom) Nr. 1700/2003 vom 22. Septem ber 2003  
(ABI. L 243 vom 27 .9.2003, S. 1), ist diese Datei der Öffentlichkeit zugänglich. Soweit  
erforderlich, wurden die Verschlusssachen in dieser Datei in Übereinstimmung mit Artikel 5  
der genannten Verordnung freigegeben.  
COMMISSION  
OF THE
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES
G e n e ra l S e c re ta ria tCOM(85) 152 final 
Brussels, 2 April 1985
FO R  OFFICIAL U S E  ONLY
Proposal for a
c q u n c i l_decision
on common positions of Member States on proposals submitted 
to the 5th meeting of the Conference of the Parties to the 
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of 
Wild Fauna and Flora, to be held in Buenos Aires, Argentina, 
from 22 April to 3 May 1985
(submitted by the Commission to the Council)
C0M(85) 152 final

CONFIDENTIAL
COMMISSION COMMUNICATION TO THE COUNCIL
I
Subject :  Proposals submitted to the 5th meeting of the Conference of the
Parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered 
Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), to be held in Buenos 
'  Aires, Argentina, from 22 April to 3 May 1985.
1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. Development
Since the entry into force of Council Regulation (EEC) n° 
3626/82 <1) on 1 January 1984, Belgium, Luxembourg and the
Netherlands became effective parties to the Convention so that 
at present eight Community Member States are a party.
Ratification/accession procedures could not yet be finalized by 
Ireland and Greece. Today the Convention has 87 Parties.
The 5th meeting of the Conference of the Parties will take place 
in Buenos Aires, Argentina, from 22 April to 3 May 1985.
The European Communities will, as at all previous meetings, 
participate in the capacity of observer in accordance with 
Article XI (7) of the Convention. The Convention Secretariat was 
informed accordingly in October 1984.
(1) Council Regulation (EEC)N° 3626/82 of 3.12.1982, on the 
implementation in the Community of the Convention on 
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and 
Flora (OJ L 384 of 31.12.82)

1.2. Community accession to the Convention
In September and October 1982 the Council Working Party on the 
Environment discussed and approved a Commission proposal for an 
amendment to Article XXI of the Convention allowing the 
Community as such to accede.
The Danish government, supported by the required one-third of 
the Parties, requested the Convention Secretariat to convene an 
extra-ordinary meeting which was held on 30 April 1983, at the 
end of the 4th regular meeting of the Conference of the Parties 
in Gaborone, Botswana.
It resulted in the adoption of a substantially modified text of 
the amendment, submitted by the United States in agreement with 
the Community, with 27 votes in favour, 9 against and 6
abstentions.
Amendments to the Convention enter into force for the parties 
which have accepted them 60 days after two-thirds of the parties 
have deposited an instrument of acceptance with the depositary 
government (Article XVII (3) of the Convention). In accordance 
with Resolution Conf. 4.27 of the Conference of the Parties, 
the "Community-amendment" will enter into force after its 
acceptance by two-thirds of the parties, i.e. 54, "at the time 
of its adoption".
2. INSTITUTIONAL AND LEGAL PROBLEMS RELATED TO THE ESTABLISHMENT OF  
COMMON POSITIONS TO BE TAKEN BY THE MEMBER STATES ON PROPOSALS  
SUBMITTED TO THE CONFERENCE OF THE PARTIES.
2.1. The Commission considers that since the adoption of Council 
Regulation N° 3626/82 of 3 December 1982 on the implementation 
in the Community of the Convention on international trade in 
endangered species of wild fauna and flora the Community has 
(external) competence in all matters concerning the regulation

of trade in specimens of endangered species, e.g. even in 
respect of species not yet included in the Annexes to the 
Regulation. This argument is based on the proposition that to 
modify the Convention would be to "affect" (in the sense of the 
ERTA - case )the Regulation, because the latter would need to 
be amended to take into account the modifications. The 
objectives of the Regulation were in effect to prevent that 
national implementing measures, which were not uniform, would 
affect the free movement of products within the Community and 
would lead to distorsions of competition (see 5th and 6th 
recital). Therefore, it was considered necessary at Community 
level to ensure that certain commercial policy instruments to be 
employed under the Convention are uniformly applied (4th 
recital). Those objectives cannot be attained unless the 
Community has external competence in all matters concerning the 
regulation of trade in specimens of endangered species.
In the opinion of the Commission, Article 15(3) of Regulation N° 
3626/82 cannot be invoked to support an argument that the 
Community has no external competences with regard to species not 
yet covered by CITES, but for which proposals have been 
submitted to the Conference for including them. Article 15(3) 
has only internal effect. It allows Member States to apply in 
intracommunity trade certain restrictions for the trade in 
species not covered by the Regulation - restrictions which must 
be similar to those provided for in the Regulation. That Article 
defines, therefore, the measures which are considered to be 
justified under Article 36.
2.2. The Commission refers to the declaration it made in the Council 
minutes at the adoption of Regulation N° 3626/82.
It stays convinced that the main legal basis for any Community 
action on the subject is Article 113 of the EEC Treaty. However, 
the Community is not yet a Party to CITES. In these
22/70, (1971) ECR, 263

circumstances, the Member States have the obligation under 
Article 5 of the EEC-Treaty to facilitate the exercise by the 
Community of its competence at the Conference.
The Commission considers that during the transitional period, 
until the Community becomes a Party to CITES, the instrument for 
defining a common position with regard to the proposed 
amendments at the Conference is that given by Article 116 of the 
EEC Treaty. This Article states that Member States shall, in 
respect of all matters of particular interest to the common 
market, proceed within the framework of international 
organisations of an economic character only by common action and 
provides for the Commission to submit proposals for this 
purpose.
It is apparent from the motivation of Regulation n° 3626/82 that 
any amendment concerning the Annexes of the Convention is of 
particular interest to the common market.
With regard to the question whether CITES can be regarded as an 
international organisation of an economic character, the answer 
has to be affirmative. Although it cannot be denied that the 
objectives of CITES mainly relate to the protection of the 
environment, the instruments used to achieve the objectives are 
purely commercial. The Convention regulates the trade in 
endangered species, as appears already from its title. No other 
instruments are foreseen. CITES has therefore to be considered 
as an international organisation of an economic character, even 
if it has also other characteristics.
*******
The Commission proposes that the Council adopt the attached proposal for a
Council Decision.

COUNCIL DECISION
on common positions of Member States on proposals 
submitted to the 5th meeting of the Conference of the 
Parties to the Convention on International Trade in 
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, to be held 
in Buenos Aires, Argentina, from 22 April to 3 May 1985
THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,
Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Economic Community, 
and in particular Article 116 thereof,
Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,
Whereas the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of 
wild fauna and flora is implemented in the Community by Council Regulation 
(EEC) N°. 3626/82 (1);
Whereas proposals for resolutions and amendments to the Appendices of the 
Convention are susceptible to affect the Regulation;
Whereas the Community is not yet a contracting party to the Convention, 
although an amendment for this purpose is at present before the 
contracting parties for their acceptance;
(1) OJ. N° L 384 of 31.12.1982, p. 1

«
Whereas in these special circumstances it is for the Member States to act 
with respect to the proposals, within the framework of a common position 
to be decided by the Council;
HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS :
Article 1
The common positions of Member States to be taken at the 5th meeting of 
the Conference of the Parties to the Convention on International Trade in 
Endangered Species of wild fauna and flora shall be in accordance with the 
positions contained in the annex to this decision.
Article 2
1. Where a common position referred to in Article 1 is likely to be 
affected by new scientific or technical information presented before or 
during the meeting of the Conference of the Parties, Member States 
shall review this position in the light thereof and establish a common 
position on the proposal concerned before the Conference of the Parties 
is called to vote on it.
2. On proposals, on which a common position is not contained in the annex, 
such a position shall be established before the Conference of the 
Parties is called to vote on them.
Done at Brussels, .. April 1985. For the Council,

ANNEX to CounciL Decision of .. April 1985 on common positions of Member  
States on proposals submitted to the 5th meeting of the Conference of the  
Parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of  
uild fauna and flora.
Agenda item XIII - Interpretation and implementation of the Convention
1. Report on national reports under Article VII/. paragraph 7, of the 
Convention (doc. 5.19 and 5.20)
(a) The discussions of the Technical Committee (Brussels, June 1984) 
demonstrate that neither of the identified main functions of 
annual reports is being effectively fulfilled. The available 
annual reports do not allow the monitoring of the implementation 
of the Convention by its Parties nor the monitoring of the 
quantity of trade in specimens of listed species, because of the 
failure to submit annual reports, late submissions and incomplete 
and improper compilation of annual reports. This situation was 
discussed at all previous meetings of the Conference of the 
Parties, the Technical Committee and several Working Groups and 
was subject to a number of resolutions, however, without a marked 
improvement. This implies that in its ten years of existence the 
Convention has not been able to provide reliable data which would 
allow the drawing of conclusions with regard to the effects of 
international trade on the conservation status of the species it 
covers.
The Common position is to support any action aimed at a better 
functioning of the annual' reporting system.

-2-
(b) In the context of the discussion on annual reports 
the question of reports on intra-Community trade will be brought 
up. This issue was discussed at the June 1984 Technical Committee 
meeting, on the basis of a report from its working group on annual 
reports, at the 1984 general meeting of I.U.C.N. in Madrid and at 
the seminar on CITES implementation in Asia and Oceania held in 
Kuala Lumpur in October 1984. India submitted a draft resolution 
to the Conference of the Parties (doc. 5.20) recommending that 
each party to the Convention which is a member of a regional trade 
agreement within the meaning of Article XIV (3) of the Convention, 
include in its annual reports information on trade with other 
member states of that agreement, unless the record-keeping and 
reporting duties are in direct conflict with the provisions of the 
regional trade agreement.
Apart from the technical and physical impossibility to report on 
intra-Community trade in CITES specimens under the system adopted 
for the implementation of CITES in the Community, the controls 
necessary for such reporting would indeed be in direct conflict 
with the provisions (and the aims) of the Treaty. Although the 
proposal appears to have been put forward with regard to the 
Community, the common position is to abstain. A declaration shall 
be made on behalf of the Community explaining that for the above 
reasons the Community does not consider itself to be affected by 
the recommendations of the resolution. With a view to the
possible negative consequences of a discussion on the issue, it 
will be necessary to allay the concern of some of the parties in 
this matter. Member States shall in their contacts with other 
Parties and non-governmental organizations explain the functioning 
of the Community regulations to implement the Convention.
2. Trade in ivory from African elephants (doc. 5.22)
This resolution, prepared and submitted by the United Kingdom, was 
discussed at the June 1984 Technical Committee meeting and found 
general support.The Committee on the Convention, established under

-3-
Council Regulation (EEC) N°.3626/82, identified a number of 
difficulties related to the recommendations with regard to trade in 
stocks held in non-producer countries, i.e. stocktaking and marking 
before re-export. It agreed to submit an alternative approach, 
fixing a deadline for the re-export of unmarked stocks, to the 
Conference of the Parties for discussion. In view of the important 
step forward in the conservation of African elephant populations 
represented by this resolution, it deserves to be supported. Member 
States shall discuss the alternatives for the treatment of re­
exported ivory and possibilities to ensure that annual quotas are 
based on scientifically sound management plans.
The common position is to vote in favour of the resolution 
resulting from the discussions of the Conference of the Parties.
3. Trade in leopard skins (doc. 5.23)
Resolution Conf. 4.13 allows trade in leopard skins for non- 
primarily commercial purposes (hunting trophees, personal effects, 
household goods) and in limited quantities (quotas agreed by the 
Conference of the Parties and only one skin per person per year). 
Zimbabwe, Zambia and Tanzania propose higher annual quotas which 
would be more in line with the number of animals actually killed 
either in the framework of management plans or for the defense of 
life and property.
Zimbabwe proposes that it be allowed to set annual quotas itself 
and communicate its decision to the Secretariat or - in case the 
Conference would not agree - that the Conference sets a quota of 
350 animals per year.
Zambia submitted two similar proposals with an annual quota of 300 
animals.

-4-
Tanzania proposes to increase its quota from 60 to 250.
These proposals require careful consideration given the relation 
between financial benefits and the willingness of landholders to 
protect the species. The common position shall be established in 
the light of a discussion by the Conference of the Parties and, 
particularly in the case of the proposal by Tanzania, on the basis 
of additional scientific advice.
4. Trade in plant specimens (doc. 5.24)
The Plant Working Group, a sub-committee of the Technical 
Committee, made a great number of recommendations with regard to an 
improved implementation of the Convention for plants. The
recommendations in Annex 1 and those under a) and b) of Annex 2) to
doc. 5.24 have been endorsed by the Technical Committee in June 
1984.
The common position is to support the recommendations concerned.
Recommendation c) of Annex 2 poses a number of difficulties. Its 
adoption would imply the use of plant health certificates, instead 
of export permits, for Appendix I plants propagated artificially 
for commercial purposes. This is not in conformity with the 
accepted interpretation of Article VII, paragraph 4, of the 
Convention. A second problem is related to the present
impossibility to adapt the plant health certificate to the
requirements of the recommendation under ii).
The common position is to discuss these difficulties in the Plant 
Working Group meetings and to not support recommendation c) of 
Annex 2 to doc. 5.24.

-5-
5. Trade in ranched specimens (doc. 5.25)
This proposal, for a uniform marking system for products from 
ranching operations is a significant contribution to a solution of 
the identification problems related to trade in suon products.
Although it is not clear how this resolution will affect existing 
ranching operations and those submitted to the Conference of the 
Parties for approval at this meeting and although the
practicability of certain elements of the proposed resolution 
require further discussion.
The common position is to support its basic ideas.
6. Significant trade in Appendix II species (doc. 5/..)
The document concerned is not yet available. The subject therefore 
requires that a common position is established at a later stage.
7. Control of "readily recognizable" parts and derivatives (doc. 5/..)
The proposed resolution recommends the adoption by all Parties of a 
definition of the word "specimen" similar to the wording chosen for 
Article 2 of Council Regulation (EEC) n° 3626/82 in the version 
proposed by the Commission with document (COM (83) 557 of 26/9/83 
(O.J. C 272 of 11/10/83, p. 7). The adoption of this proposal by 
the Council awaits the outcome of the meeting of the Conference of 
the Parties with regard to exempted parts and derivatives. Is has 
proven impossible to introduce a "minimum list" similar to Annex B 
of Regulation 3626/82.
As its recommendation contributes to a better control of parts and 
derivatives, the common position is to support the resolution.

-6-
8. Definition of "primarily commercial purposes" (doc. 5/28)
Although the proposed resolution and its introduction demonstrate 
that a generally applicable definition of this term cannot be 
given, the resolution and the examples contained in its annex 
represent an important guideline for importing Parties in 
considering the issue of an import permit for Appendix I specimens.
The common position is to support the resolution.
9. Time validity of import permits (doc. 5/29)
The proposed resolution recommends that, for the purposes of 
paragraphs 2 and 4 of Article III of the Convention, a (re)exporting 
country considers an import permit to be invalid if it is presented 
six months after its date of issue. The proposal leaves it up to 
the Conference of the Parties to decide whether the recommendation 
should apply to all Appendix I specimens or to live specimens only. 
The common position is to support the resolution in annex 1 to doc. 
5/29 which is in line with the provisions of Commission Regulation 
(EEC) N° 3418/83 on the subject.
IQ.Certificate of origin for Appendix III specimens (doc. 5/30)
The recommendation that the certificate of origin provided for in 
paragraph 3 of Article V of the Convention shall be issued by the 
competent CITES management authority solves the problem related to 
the different meaning of such a certificate issued under customs 
regulations. The common position is to support this resolution 
and to suggest that it is extended with a recommendation which 
defines the term "country of origin" for CITES purposes along the 
following line :
a) For the purposes of the Convention, the term "country of origin" 
shall mean the country in which the specimens were taken from 
the wild, bred in captivity or artificially propagated.

-7-
b) ........
11
. Definition of "pre-Convention specimen" (doc. 5/31)
This document deals with all aspects of the "pre-Convention" issue 
in great detail and clarifies the interpretation and implementation 
difficulties related to the wording of Article VII, paragraph 2, of 
the Convention and those that have arisen since the adoption of 
Resolution Conf. 4.11.
The common position is support the proposed resolution.
12. Cayman Turtle Farm (doc. 5/32)
This draft resolution was submitted by the United Kingdom on the 
request of the Secretariat and provides an alternative to the 
proposal to transfer the captive Cayman Islands green turtle 
population from Appendix I to Appendix II.
This resolution approach is the most appropriate. The absence of a 
wild population within the jurisdiction of the Cayman Islands 
excludes the adoption of a proposal on the basis of Resolution 
Conf. 3.15. The condition under a) of that Resolution, that a wild 
population of an Appendix I species occurring within the 
jurisdiction of a Party which is deemed to be no longer endangered 
and to benefit by ranching, is an essential element of the 
carefully designed ranching concept as such. Unfortunately the 
Cayman Turtle Farm has sofar not been able to meet the condition 
under c) iii) of Resolution Conf. 2.12 on captive breeding. It 
cannot be considered to manage its parental breeding stock in a 
manner which "has been demonstrated to be capable of reliably 
producing second-generation offspring in a controlled environment". 
However, the Cayman Turtle Farm operations are conducted in such a 
way that they satisfy the remaining criteria of both Resolutions 
Conf. 2.12 and Conf. 3.15, its continued efforts are likely to 
result in the production of second-generation offspring in the near

-8-
future and its species survival research, educational activities, 
etc. are to be considered as providing clear benefits to seaturtle 
conservation. The common position is therefore to support the
resolution contained in the annex to document 5.32, provided that 
it is extended with an additional control mechanism- For that 
purpose an additional paragraph shall be added to the draft 
resolution, reading :
e) that this Resolution be reviewed at the 7th 
meeting of the Conference of the Parties.
13.Regular review of alleged infractions (doc. 5/33)
The proposed resolution appears to charge the Technical Committee 
with functions attributed to the Secretariat under subparagraphs 
(d) and (e) of Article XII, paragraph 2, of the Convention. This 
resolution can therefore only be adopted with the consent of the 
Secretariat.
The common position shall be based on the reaction of the 
Secretariat on the matter.
14.Interpretation of Article XIV, paragraph 1 (doc. 5/34)
This draft resolution, prepared by ten African parties during the 
June 1984 seminar on the implementation of CITES in Africa, is a 
result of the dissatisfaction of certain producer countries with 
stricter measures taken in consumer countries with regard to trade 
in Appendices II and III specimens and in specimens of species not 
covered by CITES. During the seminar, the Community was criticized 
for its provisions in relation to Annex C to Council Regulation N°. 
3626/82 and mention was made of the U.S. Endangered Species Act and 
the Australian Wildlife Protection Act. Inspite of the detailed 
oral and written information on the functioning of the Community 
regulations on CITES, provided at the June 1984 seminar and at 
previous meetings of the Conference of the Parties, a number of

producer countries persists in regarding stricter measures in 
consumer countries as interference in their national affairs. While 
recognizing the concern of producer countries, the Council is of 
opinion that Article XIV, paragraph 1, of the Convention leaves no 
room for a resolution of this kind.
The common position is therefore to oppose the proposal concerned.
15.Interpretation of "the text of the proposed amendment"
The document concerned is not yet available.
16.A CITES register of traders in live specimens of wild fauna (doc. 
5/36)
The proposed resolution aims at protecting the interests of bona 
tide traders through their inclusion in a register containing their 
names, licence numbers, addresses, telephone and telex numbers, the 
names and addresses of their managers or directors and the kind of 
their trade. Permits should only be issued to traders figuring in 
the register. The system is also supposed to assist management and 
scientific authorities in carrying out their duties and to help 
producer countries economically. The register is to be made 
available to alt parties. Although the problem of illegal wildlife 
dealers is well-known and requires the constant attention of the 
parties, it is highly unlikely that the proposed register will 
contribute to its solution. Annex 2 to document 5.36, explaining 
the term "register", limits its function to assisting a management 
authority in finding out whether a trader exists or not. The fact 
that the Convention does not require import permits for Appendices 
II and III specimens reduces that limited function even further and 
the fact that the register is only to be updated once a year 
implies the risk that decisions are based on the wrong information. 
Because of the very limited practical use compared to the enormous 
administrative burden, the common position is to oppose the 
proposed resolution.

-10 -
17.Relationship between CITES Transport Guidelines for Live Animals 
and IATA Live Animals Regulations (doc. 5/..)
The document concerned is not yet available,
1 ?-cndorsement _in principle of a convention for the protection of
ar
rimals (doc. 5/38)
The common position is to support the proposed resolution on the 
condition that a closer link in its preamble is made to the
relevant CITES provisions on transport of and suitable accomodation 
for live animals and that the words "and without prejudice to the 
position of their governments with regard to its content and future 
conclusion" are added after the words "approves in principle" .
Agenda item XIV - General matters of principle relating to the
appendices
1. Ten Year Review of the Appendices (doc. 5/..)
The document concerned is not yet available. It is, however, a 
well-known fact that the system established with Resolution Conf. 
3.20 did not have the expected result. The only serious revision 
carried out was that concerning European species. In view of the 
importance of appropriate listings in the Appendices, the common
nosition is tosupport any oroposals aiming at a better
implementation of Resolution Conf. 3,20,
2, ·Consideration of the criteria for amendment of Appendices I and II
(doc.  5/40)
At the June 1984 seminar on the implementation of CITES in Africa, 
? Resolution was prepared recommending that in the case of taxa 
included in Appendix I before the adoption of Resolution Conf. 1.1.
l-qf cHteri·?) and for which the data required for their transfer 
d · ' JI cannot be .red within a reasonable time or with

-11 -
reasonable effort, the criteria of Resolution Conf. 1.2., shall not 
be applied if the countries of origin agree to introduce a quota 
system.
While recognizing the difficulties of developing countries in 
obtaining biological data which would meet the Berne criteria, it 
must be noted that a country of origin will in the absence of such 
data not be able to meet the conditions of Article IV.2.(a) of the 
Convention. Quotas which are not based on biological data are 
arbitrary and may result in over-exploitation. The adoption of the 
Resolution concerned would not be compatible with the provisions of 
the Convention and therefore the common position is to reject the 
proposal.
3. Guidelines for the Secretariat when making recommendations in 
accordance with Article XV (doc. 5/..)
The document is not yet available.
4. Criteria for the inclusion of species in Appendix III (doc. 5/42)
The common position is to support the recommendations under a) and 
b) of the draft resolution in which it is established that only 
those species shall be covered by Appendix III which are native to 
the country which submitted the species for inclusion (an important 
clarification of the situation with regard to family listings) and 
that only those species are included in Appendix III which are 
subject to conservation measures within the jurisdiction of the 
country concerned. Export restrictions for other than conservation 
purposes would not justify Appendix III listing.
With regard to recommendations c) and d) the common position is to 
be established in the' light of the discussion thereof with 
producer countries.

-12 -
5. Nomenclature and taxonomy used in the appendices (doc.5/..)
The document concerned is not yet available. The common position  
is to follow the recommendations of the Nomenclature Committee on  
this subject.
Agenda item _XV_ Consideration of proposals for amendment of
Ap
pendices I and II
1. Proposals submitted pursuant to the resolution on ranching
1.1. The Australian proposal to transfer its Crocodylus porosus 
population from I to II
This proposal was earlier submitted to the 4th meeting of the  
Conference of the Parties in 1983 and withdrawn on the  
recognition that it did not provide adequate data on the status  
and on the conservation management of the population concerned  
and that it did not meet the Berne criteria. These shortcomings  
have been overcome in the new submission. The common position is  
to support the proposal. The IUCN/SSC Crocodile Specialist Group  
unanimously supported the proposal at its October 1984 meeting,  
believing that it will have benefits for the conservation of the  
species without detriment to the Australian Crocodylus porosus  
population.
Indonesian proposal to transfer its Crocodylus porosus 
population from I to II
The IUCN/SSC Crocodile Specialist Group unanismously opposed this  
proposal on the basis that the provided information is sometimes  
misleading and that essential data on the conservation status,  
■field studies to provide a management basis, control of hunting,  
regulations on the collection of young crocodiles to stock farms,

-13-
licensing of hunters and farmers, the marking of hides, etc. are  
missing. Recent reports on the Irian Jaya situation indicate that  
the population is heavily depleted.
As the proposal clearly neither meets the Berne criteria nor  
those of Resolution Conf. 3.12. The common position is to oppose  
it while recognizing the need of the Indonesian government to  
relate conservation efforts to revenues.
1.3.  The French proposal to transfer the Chelonia ntydas populations of  
Europe and Tromelin Islands from I to II
A similar proposal was submitted to the 4th meeting of the  
Conference of the Parties in 1983 and withdrawn because of the  
fact that essential data for a proper consideration of the merits  
of the proposal were lacking.
The question is therefore whether the present proposal contains  
sufficient information allowing the Conference of the Parties to  
reach a positive decision.
The reports of a team of seven international experts who  
investigated the operation in March 1984 are generally supportive  
of the ranch. The proposal meets the conservation criteria laid  
down in Resolution Conf. 3.15 and if, at the Conference of the  
Parties, the French delegation provides some additional  
information on marking techniques, the requirements of Resolution  
Conf. 3.15 will also be met in that respect.
The common position is to support the proposal.
1.4. The proposal from Suriname to transfer its Chelonia mydas 
population from I to II .

-14-
This proposal was approved by the Conference of the Parties at  
its 4th meeting in 1983 subject to the approval of an adequate  
marking system. Item 7 of the proposal describes the proposed  
marking techniques in detail, which fully meet the requirements  
of Resolution Conf. 3.15.
In accordance with the decision of the 4th meeting of the  
Conference of the Parties, the common position is to support the  
proposal.
1.5. The proposal from the United Kingdom to transfer the captive  
population of Chelonia my das in the Cayman Islands from I to II.
The position referred to under agenda item XIII - 12 refers which  
implies that this ranching proposal shall be withdrawn at an  
appropriate moment during the discussions of the Conference on the  
subject and in any event before the Conference would be called to vote  
on it. Member States shall ensure that document 5.32 is decided on by  
the Conference before the ranching proposal would be considered.
2. Other proposals for amendment of Appendices I and II
Australia 2 - Inclusion of Hoptocephalus bundaroides in II
The species is endemic to Australia, is protected under Australian  
law, the proposal indicates that there is no legal international  
trade and that nothing is known about illegal trade. It is doubtful  
whether the proposal meets the Berne criteria (lack of information  
on population size and trends and minimal risks of the species  
entering trade). In view of the very restricted distribution area  
and to avoid that the species will enter trade, the common position  
is to nevertheless support the proposal unless Australia can be  
convinced of listing the species in Appendix III.

Australia 3 - Inclusion of Rheobatrachus spp. in Appendix II
These frogs are sought after for scientific research. The position  
on the preceding proposal refers.
Australia 4 - 8  - The inclusion of Hippopus hippopus, H.
porcellanus, Tridacna crocea, T. maxima and  
T. squamosa in Appendix II.
The above five species of giant clam are probably less vulnerable  
to trade, because of their smaller size, lower value and faster  
rates of growth, than the two species included in Appendix II in  
1983 (Tridacna gigas and Tridacna derasa). The biological and trade  
data presented in the proposal meet the Berne criteria. The  
adoption of the proposal would result in full Appendix II coverage  
of the Tridacnid family which would eliminate the problems of the  
identification of parts and derivatives caused by the earlier  
inclusion of only two species of the family.
The common position is to support the proposal.
Australia 9-25 - The inclusion of 17 genera of stony corals in
Appendix II.
Although there are many reasons for the inclusion of stony corals  
in Appendix II, the proposal submitted by Australia seems to be  
premature. It presents no scientific data whatsoever and only very  
general information on trade. It is further unclear if other genera  
should be covered. The proposal does not contain comments from  
other countries of origin nor addresses likely enforcement  
difficulties.
In its present form the proposal risks to become subject to heavy  
opposition which would prejudice future improved proposals for  
stony corals. It would therefore be advisable that the proposal is

-16-
withdrawn after having been discussed at scientific working group  
Level and before the plenary session of the Conference of the  
Parties.
THe common position is to reject the proposal in the case Australia  
wishes to put it to a vote.
Australia 26 - 35 - Deletion from Appendix II of Anigozanthos spp.,
Macropidia fuliginosa, Banksia spp., 
Conospermum spp., Dryandra formosa, Dryandra 
polycephala, XyLometurn spp., Crowea spp., 
Gelznowia verrucosa and Pimelea physodes.
A similar proposal to the 4th meeting of the Conference of the  
Parties resulted in the deletion of three taxa (Chloantaceae spp.,  
Verticordia spp. and Boronia spp.). The other proposals were  
rejected. This new proposal concerns ten taxa including those that  
were earlier rejected.
The common position is to support the proposal. It concerns taxa  
which are endemic to Australia and which are now subject to  
national legislation containing sufficient safeguards for their  
protection, including provisions on management and monitoring.
Bang la Desh 1 - 2  - Transfer from I to II of Kachuga tecta tecta
and Lissemys punctata punctata.
The proposal contains no scientific data on the population status,  
mentions legal export to Singapore, Hong Kong and Malaysia inspite  
of its Appendix I listing and certainly does not meet the Berne  
criteria.
Unless the IUCN/SSC Freshwater Turtle Specialist Group supports the  
proposal inspite of its present deficiencies, the common position  
is to reject the proposal. Also see India 6.

-17 -
BangLa Desh 3 and 4 - Transfer from I to II of Varanus bengalensis
and Varanus flavescens.
Through these proposals Bangla Desh seeks to solve its prolem of  
possessing over two million lizard skins which cannot be exported  
because of the Appendix I listing of Varanus bengalensis and V^  
flavescens Although the proposals state that trapping, killing and  
hunting is prohibited since 1973, they also mention an export  
figure of over five million reptile skins, mainly of lizards,  
between 1972/73 and 1979/80.
As the proposals do not meet the Berne criteria, the common  
position is to reject them in their present form. However, Member  
States shall discuss the possibilities for alternative solutions in  
the relevant working groups and at the plenary session of the  
Conference. It should be noted that in the context of the "ten year  
review of the appendices" it was recognized that the listing of  
Varanus species appeared to require modification, but no further  
action was taken since.
A final common position shall be established in the light of the  
suggested discussions.
Brazil 1  - 8 - Transfer from II to I of seven Cattleya species and  
of Laelia tenebrosa.
The proposals do not meet the Berne criteria, only three of the  
species are protected under Brazilian law, the mentioned trade with  
the U.S. and European countries should be impossible in the absence  
of Brazilian export permits. The inclusion of single orchid species  
in Appendix I would aggravate the already existing identification  
and enforcement problems. It is also a known fact that Appendix I  
listing of orchids brings about a dramatic increase of trade  
pressure and is therefore counterproductive.

-18-
The common position is to reject the proposals concerned.
Chile __1 ^  - Transfer from I to II of the Andes population of
Fi
tzroya cupressoides.
At the 4th meeting of the Conference of the Parties, the Chilean  
coastal population was transferred from Appendix I to Appendix II.  
The data presented in this new proposal appear to meet the Berne  
criteria. Nevertheless the proposal is heavily opposed by Chilean  
and international nature conservation organizations and there is  
evidence that the numbers decrease rapidly inspite of protection  
and owing to a lack of enforcement measures.
As the biology of this unique species warrants a cautious approach,  
the common position is to reject the proposal.
ChinaJ_ - Transfer from II to I of Pygathrix (Rhinopithecus) spp.
The proposal fully meets the Berne criteria. The common position is  
to support it.
China 2 - Transfer from I to II of Selenarctos thibetanus.
The proposal contains no data on the conservations status of the  
species, it admits that in certain regions its distribution area  
was reduced and that populations decreased. It does not meet the  
Berne criteria. India and Thailand are opposed to the proposed  
downlisting. The common position is to reject the proposal.
China 3 - Transfer from I to II of the Chinese population of Felis
bengalensis bengalensis.
i-'elis bengalensis bengalensi s is indeed a common subspecies in  
China - more abundant than Felis bengalensis chinensis for example
which Listed in Appendix II.

-19-
The subspecies is, however, threatened in Thailand, protected in  
India and considered as endangered under Nepalese law. Therefore a  
transfer of the entire subspecies to Appendix II would probably not  
be feasible. A transfer of the Chinese population only would from a  
scientific point of view be appropriate but' pose enforcement  
difficulties. The present situation in which two almost identical  
subspecies, F. b. bengalensis and F. b. chinensis, are listed in  
different Appendices already makes enforcement of Appendix I  
controls almost impossible. It is obvious that the inclusion of  
some populations of F. bengalensis in Appendix I and another in  
Appendix II would lead to even more serious complications. While  
recognizing the scientific justification of the Chinese proposal,  
the common position is to reject it in its present form. The  
attention of the Parties shall be drawn to the existing  
identification problems caused by the inclusion of
F :  b. bengalensis in Appendix I and it shall be suggested to  
investigate whether on the basis of Resolution Conf.  2.20., its
transfer to Appendix II might be appropriate.
China 4 - The inclusion of Came Lus bactrianus in Appendix I.
Although its present distribution is very restricted and its  
population small, it is doubtful whether the proposal to include  
the Wild Bactrian Camel in Appendix I meets the Berne criteria.  
Information on population numbers and trends is not presented,  
there is no legal international trade and there is no information  
on illegal trade. The impossibility to distinguish between the hair  
of domestic animals and that of wild ones would make Appendix I  
listing unenforceable.
The common position is to reject the proposal.
China 5 - 7  - The inclusion in Appendix I of Cervus albirostris, 
Muntiacus crinifrons and Budorcas taxicoLor.

-20 -
The presented data are minimal and do not meet the Berne criteria.  
Additional justifications for the necessity of Appendix I listing  
should be provided during the meeting of the Conference of the  
Parties. The common position shall be established in the light of  
the recommendations of the scientific working group on amendment  
proposals (screening committee).
China 8-10 - The inclusion of Cycas panzhihuaensis, Cathaya 
argyrophyLLa and Camellia chrysantha in Appendix  
I.
These species qualify for Appendix I listing. Enforcement of  
controls would, however, be very difficult because of the fact that  
trade, if any, would be in seedlings and seeds.
The common position is to be established on the basis of the  
recommendations of the Plant Working Group.
Costa Rica 1 - The deletion of Alouatta palMata from Appendix I.
The proposal does not meet the Berne criteria as far as the  
required scientific data are concerned. It does not contain  
information on the status of the species and conservation measures  
in other countries of origin nor the comments of those countries.
The common position is to reject the proposal.
Costa Rica 2 - The inclusion in Appendix I of Jabiru micterla-
The species qualifies for Appendix I listing and ornithologists  
participating in the Conference's scientific working group on  
amendment will certainly provide more supportive evidence than that  
contained in the proposal.

-21 -
The common position is to support it.
Costa Rica 3 and 4 - The transfer of Ara ambigua and Ara macao from
II to I.
Both macaw species qualify for Appendix I. The available  
scientific data to justify the proposals are not presented but the  
cases are nevertheless clear.
The common position is to support these proposals.
Costa Rica 5 - The deletion of Bufo periglenes from Appendix I and 
its subsequent inclusion in Appendix III by Costa 
Rica.
It is not clear why this proposal was made. Total protection under  
national legislation will remain in force. Trade in live animals is  
an important potential threat if the species is downlisted. In  
addition, the proposal contains no scientific data whatsoever. The  
common position is to reject the proposal.
Denmark/Norway 1  - The transfer of the North American population of
Falco rusticoLus from II to I.
The common position is to support this proposal, which is well  
documented and fully meets the Berne criteria. Its adoption would  
repair an obvious mistake of the 3rd meeting of the Conference of  
the Parties.
Federal Republic of Germany 1 - The transfer of Monodon monoceros  
from Appendix II to I.
The proposal appears to meet the Berne criteria. The possibility  
that the annual take exceeds recruitment warrants protective  
measures. It is, however, doubtful whether the inclusion of the  
Narwhal in Appendix I would influence the hunting level. If that

-22 -
were not the case, Appendix I listing would only result in the  
impossibility to trade a by-product of a subsistence hunt
internationaly.  That question needs to be resolved before stricter  
measures under CITES are taken. National conservation measures,  
including the establishment of cautious catch quotas, might be more  
effective although it should be recognized that the fact that the  
hunt takes place in remote areas poses enforcement difficulties.
These aspects of the proposal should be discussed in the framework  
of the meeting of the Conference of the Parties. The common  
position is that, if it is established that Appendix I listing
would not reduce the hunting level, the proposal shall be
withdrawn, but to support the proposal if there is concrete  
evidence that it would influence catch levels.
Federal Republic of Germany 2-3 - The inclusion of Rana hexadactyla
and Rana tigerina in Appendix II.
The proposal presents sufficient information on international trade  
but lacks biological data which would make it meet the Berne  
criteria. If before or during the meeting of the Conference of the  
Parties, the statement that the population "was drastically reduced  
in the whole of Bangla Desh as well as in India" can be
substantiated, the common position shall - in view of the high  
volume of trade -be to support the proposal. It should be noted  
that Appendix II listing would assist countries of origin in  
designing new or adapting existing conservation measures as well as  
in enforcing such measures.
India 1  - The transfer of Loris tardigradus from II to I.
The data provided in the proposal are insufficient for it to meet  
the Berne criteria. In scientific circles there is, however, no  
doubt about the fact that population numbers have rapidly decreased

-23-
and that hunting and habitat Loss represent important factors for a  
further decline. Also in view of the potential trade threats, the  
common position is to support the proposal.
India 2 - The transfer of Presbytis entellus from I to II.
The proposal provides no population data other than that the  
"population is quite good in India". It admits that in neighbouring  
countries the populations are under pressure, that there are few in  
Pakistan and only 250-300 in Bangladesh. It also states that  
fourteen of the fifteen subspecies have a local distribution and  
that trade in those subspecies poses a threat to their populations.
The common position is to reject the proposal.
f
India 3 - The transfer of Presbytis phayrei from II to I.
The data presented in the proposal are minimal but the status of  
the species is known to justify Appendix I listing. Additional  
information, if required, can certainly be provided in the  
Conference's scientific working group on proposed amendments.
The common position is to support the proposal.
India 4 - The transfer of Equus kiang from II to I.
The remarks on the preceding proposal refer.
The common position is to support the proposal.
India 5 - The transfer of Falco jugger from II to I.

The same situation as the preceding two proposals.
The common position is to support the proposal.
India 6 - The transfer of Kachuga tecta tecta from I to II.
See proposal Bangladesh 2.
India 7 - 8  - The transfer of Trionyx gangeticus and Trionyx hurum
from I to II.
The proposals do not provide adequate biological data to meet the  
Berne criteria. Export from India is prohibited and the species are  
strictly protected. It is unclear why the species are proposed to  
be transferred to Appendix II.
The common position is to reject the proposals.
India 9 - The transfer of Saussurea lappa from II to I.
Its very limited distribution and small population numbers together  
with the potential trade threats and reported illegal trade make  
this plant a clear case for Appendix I listing.
The common position is to support the proposal.
Indonesia i  - ine transfer of the Indonesian population of CheIonia  
myoas from I to II.
The proposal provides insufficient biological data to meet the  
Berne criteria. It is clear that the endangered status of Chelonia  
mydas cannot support exploitation without compensation. The green  
turtle is only locally protected in Indonesia, the "Green Turtle  
Management Action Plan9 8  is still in its preparatory stage and  
certain aspects of it are unrealistic.

-25-
The common position is to reject the proposal.
Indonesia 2 - The transfer of Eretmochelys imbricata from I to II.
This proposal is comparable to the preceding one. The Hawksbill  
turtle is, however, not at all protected under Indonesian law.
The common position is to reject the proposal.
Malawi 1 - The transfer of Crocodylus niloticus from I to II.
This proposal is related to the proposal under agenda item XIV/2  
and was prepared by Malawi on behalf of a number of African CITES  
Parties as a result of the June 1984 seminar on the implementation  
of CITES in Africa. Appendix II to the proposal contains suggested  
quotas for each of the countries of origin. In view of the comments  
on the proposal under XIV/2 , the common position is to reject the  
proposal in its present form. It is, however, to be expected that  
a recent scientific investigation of the situation of the Nile  
crocodile in Africa - which was carried out under the auspices of  
the Secretariat and with financial contributions from the Community  
- resulted in a more concrete data base for an appraisal of the  
possibilities for a limited exploitation of the species in certain  
countries of origin. In that case the common position shall be  
established in the light of the recommendations of the relevant  
working groups of the Conference of the Parties.
Mozambique 1 - The transfer of the Mozambican population of  
Crocodilus niloticus from I to II.
The presented biological data are insufficient to meet the Berne  
criteria and it is unclear what management programme is envisaged.  
The information provided on envisaged ranching operations is also 
insufficient and the proposal does not meet the requirements of  
Resolution Conf. 3.12.

-26-
Thè common position is to reject the proposal, but the comments on  
the preceding proposal refer.
Seychelles i - The transfer of the population of the Seychelles of  
EretmocheLys imbricata from I to II.
The proposal admits that the population is declining which is in  
itself sufficient to reject the transfer from Appendix I to II. It  
further admits that there is an important illegal trade. The  
envisaged restriction of the hunt and of exports to male turtles is  
unenforceable because of look-alike problems.
The common position is to reject the proposal.
Sweden 1  - The inclusion of Cystophora cristata in Appendix II.
Although the proposal was prepared before the data presented and  
discussed at the January 1985 meeting of the NAFO Standing  
Committee on Fisheries Science, where available, most of the  
scientific data provided are still valid. The aerial surveys  
carried out in 1984 in the Davis Strait and at the Front resulted  
in the first reliable estimates of the size of the Northwest  
Atlantic population. Calculations of the population dynamics  
indicate that that stock should be able to sustain the Greenland  
catch plus a take of up to 12.000 animals at the Front. These  
conclusions must be interpreted with some caution. Estimates of  
total mortality for the Front herd indicate that it has suffered a  
very high hunting mortality that does not appear to be compatible  
with a population size of around 250.000 animals. These and other  
inconsistencies can only be resolved by further scientific studies.  
Ihe data base on the ether hooded seal populations is still the  
same and is reflected in the proposal. Because of the fact that the  
present low hunting level is mainly due to measures taken by the  
(c-mmumty , outside the framework of CITES, international monitoring  
red,.

-27-
The common position is to support the proposal.
Switzerland 1-5 - The deletion of Gymnocarpus przeualskii, 
Melandrium mongolieus. Si Lene mongolica,
Stellaria pulvinata and Ammopi ptanthus
mongoLi cum from Appendix I.
The species are not included in the IUCN Plant Red Data Book, there  
is no existing legal or illegal international trade and there is no  
potential trade threat. The species were included in Appendix I in  
1973 and the Threatened Plants Committee proposed their deletion at  
the 3rd meeting of the Conference of the Parties in 1981.
The common position is to support the proposal.
Switzerland 6-7 - The deletion of Thermopsis mongotica and
Caryopteris mongolica from Appendix II.
The remarks on the preceding proposals refer.
The common position is to support the proposals.
Tunisia 1 - The inclusion in Appendix II of Vulpes (Fennecus)  
zerda.
The biological data provided do not meet the Berne criteria but the  
reported illegal trade circuit is sufficient reason for protective  
measures.
The common position shall be established in the light of the  
results of the Conference's scientific working group on amendments.
United Kingdom 1 - The inclusion in Appendix II of Gruidae spp.
(species not yet included in Appendix I).

-28 -
Eleven species are already included in the Appendices and this  
proposal, made as a result of a recommendation of the screening  
committee at the 4th meeting of the Conference of the Parties, aims  
at listing the remaining nine species in Appendix II which is in  
accordance with the Berne criteria.
The common position is to support the proposal.
U.S.A. 1 - The deletion of Hi rounga angustirostris from 
Appendix II.
The biological data provided would justify deletion of the species  
from Appendix II. Past exploitation of both the Northern and  
Southern elephant seal nearly led to their extinction and future  
exploitation cannot be ruled out. Both Argentina and Australia are  
of opinion that continued careful international monitoring is  
requi red.
The common position is therefore to therefore reject the proposal.
U-S.A. 2 - The inclusion of Brachypelma smith i in Appendix II.
The proposal lacks population data but the high international  
demand and existing illegal trade warrants monitoring. The fact
that the species is easily confused with Brachypelma emilia and
that both these species are frequently traded as MAphonapeima  
species·“, however, makes that monitoring difficult. It is therefore  
not clear why B. emilia was not proposed for Appendix II
•iimnltanesouly, especially because trade is likely to shift easily 
to that species.
me common position shall be established in the Light of the
results cf the lonterence1 s Scientific working group on amendments.

-29-
U.S.A. 3 - Transfer of Ceratozamia spp. from II to I.
The proposal lacks biological data. The common position shall be  
established in the light of the recommendations of the Plant  
Working Group.
U.S.A. 4 - The inclusion of all parts and derivatives of FLORA spp.  
listed in Appendix II, except those specified.
This proposal needs to be discussed in the Plant Working Group.  
Parties were given time until 20/1/1985 to suggest additional  
exceptions.
The common position shall be established on the basis of the  
recommendations of the Plant Working Group.