CELEX: 51985PC0152
Language: en
Date: 1985-04-02
Title: Proposal for a 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 (submitted by the Commission to the Council)

ARCHIVES HISTORIQUES
DE LA COMMISSION
COLLECTION RELIEE DES
DOCUMENTS "COM"
COM (85) 152
Vol. 1985/0049
 ---pagebreak--- Disclaimer
Conformément 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
règlement.
In accordance with Council Regulation (EEC, Euratom) No 354/83 of 1 February 1983
concerning the opening to the public of the historical archives of the European Economic
Community and the European Atomic Energy Community (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 file 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 1983 über die Freigabe der historischen Archive der Europäischen
Wirtschaftsgemeinschaft und der Europäischen Atomgemeinschaft (ABI. L 43 vom 15.2.1983,
S. 1), geändert durch die Verordnung (EG, Euratom) Nr. 1700/2003 vom 22. September 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.
 ---pagebreak---                                                                                    C O M (85) 152 final
       COMMISSION                                                                   B ru s s e ls , 2 April 1985
            OF THE
EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES                                                                FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY
    G e n e ra l S e c re ta ria t
                                                             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
 ---pagebreak---                                                                  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)
 ---pagebreak---    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
 ---pagebreak---          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
 ---pagebreak---          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.
 ---pagebreak---                                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
 ---pagebreak---                     «
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,
 ---pagebreak--- 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.
 ---pagebreak---                                   - 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
 ---pagebreak---                                      -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.
 ---pagebreak---                                      -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.
 ---pagebreak---                                    -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.
 ---pagebreak---                                     - 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.
 ---pagebreak---                                           -7-
     b) . . . . . . . .
1 1 . 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 t he near
 ---pagebreak---                                   -  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
 ---pagebreak---    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.
 ---pagebreak---                                          - 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
     arrimals (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. T en 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 - q f c H t e r i·?) and for which the data required for their transfer
             d ·' JI cannot be             .red within a reasonable time or with
 ---pagebreak---                                    - 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.
 ---pagebreak---                                               -  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.
A g e nda      i t e m _ XV_   Consideration           of  proposals    for  amendment  of
Ap p e n d i c e s I and II
1. P r o p o s a ls 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 co nservation management of the po pu lation 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 co nservation of the
        species without detriment to the Australian                    Crocodylus porosus
        population.
                  Indonesian   pr o p o s al    to    transfer  its   Crocodylus porosus
        population from I to II
       The IUCN/SSC Crocodile Specialist Group u n an ism ou sly opposed this
       proposal on the basis that the provided information is sometimes
       misleading and that essential data on the conserv at ion status,
       ■field studies to provide a management basis,                  control of hunting,
       regulations on the collection of young crocodiles to stock farms,
 ---pagebreak---                                      -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 wi thdrawn 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 ge nerally 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 .
 ---pagebreak---                                    -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 te chniques 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 mydas 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   wi thdrawn   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 d i st rib ut ion 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.
 ---pagebreak--- 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   H ippopus   hippopus,    H.
                           po r c e l l a n u s ,   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 d e r a s a ). 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 - 2 5    - 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
 ---pagebreak---                                   -16-
withdrawn after having been di scussed 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 po pulation 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.
 ---pagebreak---                                -  17 -
BangLa Desh 3 and 4 - Transfer from I to II of Vara nus 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 V a ranus 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 me ntioned 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 id entification
 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.
 ---pagebreak---                                       -18-
The common position is to reject the proposals concerned.
Chile _ _ 1^ - Transfer          from  I to  II of   the  Andes population  of
                 Fitzroya 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 pr esented 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.
Ch inaJ_ - 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 distrib ut ion 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 po pulation of Felis
              be n g a l e nsis 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.
 ---pagebreak---                                     -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. ch i n e n s i s , 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.             b e n g a lensis 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 C o n f .                  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.
 ---pagebreak---                                      - 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 - 1 0      - 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 conserv at ion 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 or ni thologists
participating     in     the   Conference's     scientific    working     group  on
amendment will certainly provide more supportive evidence than that
contained in the proposal.
 ---pagebreak---                                    - 21  -
 The common position is to support it.
 Costa Rica 3 and 4 - The transfer of Ara amb igua and Ara ma c a o 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 ne vertheless clear.
 The common position is to support these proposals.
 Costa Rica 5 - The deletion of B u f o periglenes from Appendix I and
                    its subsequent         inclusion in Appendix III by Costa
                   Rica.
 It is not clear why this proposal was made.              Total pr ot ection 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 po pu lation of
                       Falco r u s t i c o Lus 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 M o no don mo noceros
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
 ---pagebreak---                                          - 22-
 were not the case,              Appendix I listing would only result             in the
  impossibility         to    trade    a   by-product      of    a    subsistence    hunt
  i n te rna ti ona ly.    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 disc uss ed 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 dr as tically 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 co nservation 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
 ---pagebreak---                               -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 distrib ut ion 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.
 ---pagebreak--- 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 po pulation 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 po pulation of CheIonia
               myoas from I to II.
The proposal   provides       insufficient  biological  data   to  meet  the
Berne criteria.   It is clear that the en dangered status of Chelonia
mydas cannot support exploitation without compensation.            The green
turtle is only locally protected in Indonesia,           the "Green Turtle
Management  Action  P l a n 98 is   still  in  its prepara to ry  stage and
certain aspects of it are unrealistic.
 ---pagebreak---                                    -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 ex ploitation 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.
Mo za mbique   1   -  The    transfer   of  the  Mo zambican   po pulation   of
                     Crocodilus niloticus from I to II.
The pr esented biological data are insufficient to meet the Berne
criteria and it is unclear what management pr og ram me is envisaged.
The information prov ide d on envisaged ranching op er ations i s a ls o
insufficient     and the proposal does not        meet the   requirements of
Resolution Conf. 3.12.
 ---pagebreak---                                    -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 pr esented 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  po pu lation    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 po pulation 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,.
 ---pagebreak---                                -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).
 ---pagebreak---                                         - 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      ex ploitation      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 smithi in Appendix II.
The proposal      lacks    population          data   but    the    high    international
demand and     existing illegal trade warr ant s monitoring.                      The fact
that the    species    is easily confused with Br ac hyp el ma e m ilia                      and
that   both   these    species        are     frequently     traded     as   MA p h o n a p e ima
species·“, however, makes that monitoring difficult. It is therefore
not   clear    why    B.     emilia was         not    prop ose d    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 l o n t e r e n c e 1s Scientific working group on amendments.
 ---pagebreak---                                -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.