Outcomes of 2002 CITES Meeting in Chile

The elephant debate in Santiago, Chile, began with an African Elephant Range States Dialogue meeting, which took place from 29-31 October. The meeting was organized by the CITES Secretariat and chaired by the delegation from Cameroon. Only 24 of the 37 African elephant range states were in attendance.

Decisions taken at this meeting paved the way for the final results for elephants at the November 2002 CITES Conference of the Parties (CoP12).

The range states meeting focused largely on discussions of the ivory trade proposals submitted to CITES for consideration at CoP12. Ultimately, the CITES Secretariat drafted and presented a compromise proposal which was not much different from the original proposals submitted by the pro-ivory trade nations. Kenya and others firmly objected to the draft compromise proposal.

At CoP12, Botswana, Namibia and South Africa were given permission to conduct one-off sales of their specified ivory stockpiles (60 tons in total), but only if certain conditions could be met and not before May 2004.

The purpose of the time lag was  to allow the CITES Secretariat, in consultation with the CITES Standing Committee, to assess whether; a) national legislation and trade controls in importing countries were adequate and, b) the monitoring system known as MIKE (Monitoring Illegal Killing of Elephants) had provided reliable baseline information.
 
The Parties rejected further ivory trade proposals from Zimbabwe and Zambia. Kenya and India were forced to withdraw their joint proposal to put all elephant populations back on Appendix I.
 
IFAW was rightly troubled by the potential deadly impacts this decision was expected to have on elephant populations throughout the world.

Many African and Asian nations with small elephant populations had also expressed concerns about increased poaching if trade were to resume. Very soon after the CITES conference in Chile, elephant poaching had skyrocketed in Cambodia, which is home to fewer than 250 Asian elephants.

Allowing even limited ivory sales sends the message that all ivory trading is legal once again. IFAW did not consider the CoP12 decision on elephants to be a globally responsible position at the time. Sadly, in the run-up to CITES CoP 14 (2007), all of IFAW’s fears have been more than confirmed. Record seizures have been recorded in the years after the ivory trade was first banned in 1989, with quantities suggesting that more then 20,000 elephants get killed annually in Africa to supply the illegal markets.

At the time of CoP12 it was known that the African elephant population had dropped from an estimated 1.3 million in the late 70s, to 625,000 in 1989, to between 301,000 and 450,000 in 1998, largely due to ivory poaching and habitat loss.

The global population of the Asian elephant in the wild is only 35,000 to 50,000, making its survival even more precarious than the African.

Back to Top

WHALES: Japan's Proposals to Resume International Trade Rejected

Despite the 1986 worldwide moratorium on commercial whaling, Norway resumed killing Northern Hemisphere minke whales in 1992. Japan continued whaling under different guises; first, under "reservation" against the moratorium and, since 1989, as "scientific whaling."

Japan presented two proposals at CoP12 to "downlist" Bryde's and Minke whales from Appendix I to Appendix II, which would have removed CITES protection and allowed international trade. Both proposals were rejected by the CITES Parties. Japan then attempted to bring back an amended minke whale proposal which would have limited the trade proposal to specific Northwest Pacific minke whale populations. This was also rejected, offering whales yet another success.

Back to Top

HAWKSBILL TURTLES: Proposal Withdrawn

Although all species of sea turtles are in danger of extinction and receive the protection afforded by a listing on CITES Appendix I, the hawksbill continues to be critically threatened.

Hawksbill populations have declined more than 80 percent in the past 105 years.

IFAW campaigned against a proposal by Cuba to sell its stockpile of hawksbill shell on the international market, i.e. to Japan. We therefore welcomed Cuba’s August 2002 decision to withdraw this proposal after meeting strong opposition from other countries in the region and from conservationists around the world.

Since the previous CITES Conference of Parties in 2000, two meetings had taken place between governments in the Wider Caribbean to discuss hawksbill turtle conservation issues. A report of these meetings was adopted at the 2002 CITES conference.

Back to Top

FRESHWATER TURTLES: Twelve Species Given CITES

Protection The large-scale international trade in Asian freshwater turtles (chelonians) involves approximately 25 percent of the world’s chelonian species.

To meet the worldwide demand for food and traditional medicine, several million freshwater turtles are killed each year.

Combined with habitat loss, pollution, and a growing trade in turtles as aquarium pets, the long-term survival of these species -- from the temple turtle to the New Guinea giant softshell turtle -- is in serious doubt.

Twelve proposals to include Asian freshwater turtles and tortoises on CITES Appendix II were adopted by consensus of the Parties.

China, India, the United States of America, and Germany (on behalf of the European Union) proposed including on Appendix II a number of turtles and tortoise species. Based on the precautionary principles of CITES, when it has been determined that commercial trade may be detrimental to the survival of a species if that trade is not strictly controlled, the species can be listed on Appendix II.

Back to Top

GREEN SEA TURTLES: International Trade in Their Shells Not Allowed

Like all sea turtles in the Caribbean, green turtles (Chelonia mydas) have been severely depleted in the past to meet international demand for their shells, meat and eggs. This species is listed as "Endangered" by the IUCN.

At CoP12, the United Kingdom, on behalf of the Cayman Islands, presented an application to register a green turtle captive-breeding operation on Grand Cayman. If passed, this application would have allowed the sale to tourists of shell from captive-bred sea turtles.

Conservationists raised concerns about these shell sales stimulating illegal trade throughout the region. In the end, because the legality of the "founder stock" of the Grand Cayman Island Turtle Farm could not be demonstrated, the application failed to reach the two-thirds vote and was rejected.

Back to Top

SEAHORSES: Rampant Trade to be Controlled

The commercial exploitation of seahorses worldwide has become unsustainable in recent years, destroying many local populations. The global trade in seahorses exceeded an estimated 70 metric tonnes (154,280 pounds) in 2000.

This amounts to no fewer than 24.5 million individual seahorses taken each year for use as souvenirs, curios, traditional medicines, and live aquarium specimens.

Most of the 32 known species of seahorses live in the Indo-Pacific region, including Australia and Japan. Because they reproduce slowly and typically live in highly localized coastal habitats such as beds of kelp or sea grass, rocky reefs, mangroves and coral reefs, seahorses are highly susceptible to over-fishing, incidental take in nets, pollution and habitat destruction.

CITES members voted by an overwhelming majority to list the entire genus of Hippocampus on Appendix II, meaning that trade will now be strictly regulated to prevent the extinction of wild populations.

Back to Top

SHARKS: CITES Votes to Protect Two Species

Prior to CoP12 the basking shark and whale shark were already considered “Vulnerable” by the International Union for the Conservation of Nature and Natural Resources (IUCN).

The whale shark is the largest fish in the world, growing to almost 20 meters (65.5 feet) in length. The second largest fish in existence is the basking shark, so named because it appears to "bask" on the water’s surface as it feeds on zooplankton.

Alarming numbers of both basking sharks and whale sharks were known to be killed, one for liver oil and the other for meat, while both also were "finned" - their dorsal fin cut off to meet the demand for high-priced shark fin soup in the Far East. Dramatic population reductions in both species have been reported in some areas of their original ranges.

You can read about IFAW’s basking shark work on our "Big Mouth No Voice" Web pages and also the success story of public campaigning in India where once the Whale Shark was hunted and now has become the beloved mascot of the region.

At the November 2002 CITES conference, both the whale shark and basking shark won protection. Both were listed on Appendix II, which means that future trade in their body parts were restricted so that catches do not adversely affect their populations.. Both shark proposals were supported by a two-thirds majority of CITES members.

Two Resolutions concerning the conservation and management of shark populations were also adopted by the CITES Parties, one introduced by Australia the other by Ecuador. IFAW worked closely with the proponents and other governments to assist in coming to the most beneficial agreement for the marine species.

The basking shark and whale shark were the first species of shark to be listed under CITES, a move conservationists warmly welcomed.

Back to Top

MADAGASCAR SPECIES: Protection for Critters Targeted by Pet Traders

Several of Madagascar’s indigenous species received much-needed protection at CITES. IFAW had supported the new Malagasy government to develop the conservation proposals as well as Madagascar's request for these CITES listings. The move by Madagascar was a response to decades of uncontrolled international wildlife trade by the country's previous government.

Madagascar is home to more unique animal species than anywhere else in the world -- more than 270 species of reptiles, 300 species of frogs, and 100-plus mammals and insects found nowhere else on earth.

By listing some of them on Appendix I, CITES at CoP12 banned international trade in the critically endangered flat-tailed (spider) tortoise and the spiny dwarf chameleon, highly prized in the international pet trade.  In addition, twenty-five species of leaf chameleons will now be listed on Appendix II, which obliges governments to provide evidence that species traded will not suffer long term adverse effects due to international trade.

A separate proposal to regulate, but not totally ban, the trade in the microhylid frog (scaphiophyryne gottlebei) also passed. Thousands of these colorful pink and white frogs were exported each year for the global exotic pet trade.

Back to Top