The IUCN/SSC Shark Specialist Group
Shark News 13: July 2001
|
CITES Update
Sarah Fowler and Rachel Cavanagh, Shark Specialist Group
Introduction
The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) came into force in 1975 in response to concerns about the potential detrimental effects on species' survival of high levels of international trade in wild animals and plants. CITES establishes the international legal framework for the prevention of trade in endangered species of wild fauna and flora, and for effective regulation of international trade in other listed species which may become threatened in the absence of such regulation. Over 150 countries are Party to CITES, which is one of the most effective of the international wildlife conventions.
Sharks first appeared on the CITES agenda during the 9th COP (Conference of Parties) in 1994, when Resolution 9.17 on 'The Status of International Trade in Shark Species' was passed. This called for the Animals Committee of CITES to review all information concerning the biological status of sharks and effects of international trade and to submit a report to the 10th COP in 1997, and called for FAO and other international fisheries organisations to improve their research programmes and to submit new information to the 11th COP in 1999.
The CITES Appendices
Appendix I lists about 820 species threatened with extinction and for which no international trade is allowed (except under exceptional circumstances).
Appendix II lists about 29,000 species. International trade is strictly regulated and monitored to ensure that it is not detrimental to their status, but Parties control the volumes of products they export.
Appendix III lists about 230 species identified by any Party as subject to regulation within its jurisdiction in order to prevent or restrict exploitation, and as needing the cooperation of other Parties in the control of trade.
Appendix IV governs the issue of the permits required before international trade in the species listed on Appendices I-III can occur.
Amendments to the Appendices (addition or removal of species, or transfers between Appendices) may only be proposed by States. Amendments to Appendix I & II listings are made at least every two years at the COP and require a two-thirds majority vote to suceed.
Elasmobranch listing proposals
The first Chondrichthyan fish listing proposal was submitted to the 10th COP in Zimbabwe in 1997: the USA's Appendix I proposal for all species of sawfishes. Both the saws and fins of these Endangered or Critically Endangered species enter international trade. Regardless, this proposal was rejected on votes (see Shark News 10, 1998).
Following this, three species were proposed for listing at the 11th COP in Kenya, 2000: the white shark (Australia - Appendix I), whale shark (USA - Appendix II) and basking shark (UK - Appendix II). Several SSG members provided comments to IUCN during the preparation of the IUCN Analyses of Proposals provided to Parties prior to the Conference, and Co-Chair Sarah Fowler attended as a member of the IUCN Delegation.
The white shark proposal (amended to Appendix II during the meeting) and whale shark proposal failed to receive the necessary majority for adoption. The basking shark proposal, considered to present a very strong case for listing, narrowly failed to reach the necessary two-thirds majority vote in favour. Basking sharks have since been listed on Appendix III by the European Union, but reservations by Japan and Norway mean that these countries will not declare their international trade in this species.
Future developments?
While this article was being written, there were unconfirmed reports that Australia might shortly be consulting other states on a proposal to list the white shark on Appendix III. This would support Australia's domestic legislation protecting this species by ensuring that illegally exported jaws, teeth and fins are not imported by other CITES Parties. A few states which have protected their whale shark populations may also be considering Appendix III proposals for this species.
The UK government has already announced that it will be resubmitting its Appendix II proposal for the basking shark at the 12th COP in 2002. No other Appendix I or II proposals have yet been made, but white and whale sharks could well be put forward again before the deadline for proposals in May 2002 prior to next year's COP.
White shark
There is evidence from protective beach-netting, game fishing and commercial fishery catch per unit effort that populations are declining. The species is not targeted by large commercial fisheries, but is taken as bycatch, as a sport fish, and to supply the curio trade with teeth and jaws. The high price for the latter are thought to stimulate directed take of this shark in coastal fisheries and by trophy anglers. An Appendix III listing will require Australia to issue CITES permits to allow trade, and require all other parties trading in this species to issue a Certificate of Origin. The requirement for permits will assist Australia to regulate trade in specimens and enable all parties to gain a greater understanding of trade in the species and any derivatives of the species.
Whale shark
Catches of this shark, which is of great ecotourism value, have apparently declined during short-term target fisheries in several countries. It is classified as Vulnerable on the IUCN Red List. Earlier this year India followed the example of the Philippines by closing its whale shark fishery and strictly protecting the species. They are also protected in Australia, the Maldives, Honduras, Malaysia and USA. The meat is popular and expensive in some countries, particularly Taiwan, which appears to have been the main export market for the Philippines and Indian fisheries. The fins are also highly prized in parts of China, where prices of $15,000 each were reported in 1999/2000.
Basking shark
The basking shark is Red Listed as 'Vulnerable' globally, and 'Endangered' where fisheries have seriously depleted populations. The high current value of the huge fins (and formerly liver oil) has stimulated targeted fisheries and is an incentive for sharks taken in bycatch to be utilised rather than released alive. The species is protected in only part of its range and none of its fisheries managed. The UK Appendix II listing proposal is intended to ensure that its exploitation is regulated and monitored, and that fisheries driven by international trade are not detrimental to its survival.
FAO's remit
One reason for not accepting the listing proposals in 2000 made during sometimes heated debates at the COP was that CITES was not the appropriate forum for managing sharks - this is FAO's task through the IPOA-Sharks (see p.13). Certainly, the IPOA notes that national Shark Plans should aim to facilitate the identification and reporting of species-specific biological and trade data, and pay special attention to vulnerable or threatened stocks, but does not specify how this should be undertaken.
There are two main schools of thought in this respect: those who feel that CITES has no place in the management of aquatic species, and those who consider that CITES has a complementary role to fisheries management as the only body capable of monitoring and regulating international trade in threatened species.
|
|
|
|
|
