[Federal Register Volume 59, Number 215 (Tuesday, November 8, 1994)]
[Unknown Section]
[Page 0]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 94-27731]
[[Page Unknown]]
[Federal Register: November 8, 1994]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
50 CFR Part 23
Foreign Proposals to Amend Appendices to the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice of decision.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of
Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) regulates international trade in certain
animals and plants. Species for which such trade is controlled are
listed in Appendices I, II, and III to CITES. Any country that is a
Party to CITES may propose amendments to Appendix I or II for
consideration by the other Parties.
This notice announces decisions by the Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service) on negotiating positions to be taken by the United States
delegation with regard to proposals submitted by Parties other than the
United States. The proposals will be considered at the ninth regular
meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP9) to be held in Fort
Lauderdale, Florida, November 7-18, 1994. It also announces a deadline
for public recommendations regarding potential reservations that should
be taken by the United States on any listing decisions by the Parties
at COP9.
DATES: Proposals mentioned in this notice are scheduled to be discussed
along with preliminary votes by Party countries in committee on the
weekdays from approximately November 9 to 15, 1994. Final votes in
plenary sessions are likely on November 16 and 17, 1994, without
discussion unless one-third of the Parties support the reopening of
discussion on specific proposals. Any of these proposals that are
adopted will enter into effect 90 days after the close of COP9 (i.e.,
on February 16, 1995). Public comments regarding potential reservations
to be taken by the United States on listings adopted by the Parties at
COP9 need to be received by the Service's Office of Scientific
Authority by January 17, 1995.
ADDRESSES: Please send correspondence concerning this notice to the
Office of Scientific Authority; Mail Stop 725, Arlington Square; U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service; Department of the Interior; Washington, D.C.
20240. The fax number is (703) 358-2276. Express and messenger-
delivered mail should be addressed to the Office of Scientific
Authority; 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Room 750; Arlington, Virginia
22203. Comments and other information received are available for public
inspection by appointment, from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through
Friday, at the Arlington, Virginia address.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dr. Charles W. Dane, Chief, Office of
Scientific Authority, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C.
telephone: (703) 358-1708; fax: (703) 358-2276.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
CITES regulates import, export, re-export, and introduction from
the sea of certain animal and plant species. Species for which trade is
controlled are included in one of three Appendices. Appendix I includes
species threatened with extinction that are or may be affected by
international trade. Appendix II includes species that, although not
necessarily now threatened with extinction, may become so unless the
trade is strictly controlled. It also lists species that must be
subject to regulation in order that trade in other currently or
potentially threatened species may be brought under effective control
(e.g., because of difficulty in distinguishing specimens of currently
or potentially threatened species from those other species). Appendix
III includes species that any Party country identifies as being subject
to regulation within its jurisdiction for purposes of preventing or
restricting exploitation, and for which it needs the cooperation of
other Parties to control trade.
Any Party country may propose amendments to Appendices I and II for
consideration at meetings of the Conference of the Parties. The
proposal must be communicated to the CITES Secretariat at least 150
days before the meeting. The Secretariat must then consult the other
Parties and appropriate intergovernmental agencies, and communicate
their responses to all Parties no later than 30 days before the
meeting. Proposals submitted to the Secretariat are subsequently
distributed to all Parties. After preliminary review of proposals
received for consideration at COP9, the Service announced the proposals
and invited comments on tentative negotiating positions in the
September 6, 1994, Federal Register (59 FR 46023).
This notice announces the negotiating positions to be taken by the
United States delegation on proposals submitted by Parties other than
the United States for consideration at the forthcoming meeting of the
Parties. The decisions announced in this notice represent formal
guidance to the delegation. Although it is neither practical nor in the
best interests of the United States to establish inflexible negotiating
positions, the delegation will seek to obtain agreement of the
Conference of the Parties with these positions unless new information
becomes available (see Summary of Positions).
Report of the Nomenclature Committee
The Nomenclature Committee, in conjunction with the World
Conservation Monitoring Centre, has been working to review and resolve
numerous ambiguities in the appendices that arose from the listing of
taxa at the plenipotentiary and first meetings of the Conference of the
Parties. Supporting documents were not a matter of record at these
initial meetings; similar names may have had more than one
interpretation, or the scientific name used may not have been the
preferred or commonly accepted name. The Nomenclature Committee has
submitted a list of such clarifications for consideration by the
Parties at COP9. These include (a) the addition of taxonomic authority
references for all Appendix I species included in the appendices prior
to 1977, (b) revision of various spellings and the addition of
taxonomic notes to certain Appendix I species included in the
appendices prior to 1977, and (c) changes in some names of listed taxa
in accordance with the latest taxonomic revision. The United States
supports these changes except for the name changes recommended for
unionid mussels, because those names are inconsistent with the U.S List
of Endangered and Threatened Wildlife. The report also identifies taxa
that require such substantial taxonomic clarification that a regular
amendment to the appendices is warranted. A copy of this report is
available from the Office of Scientific Authority (see Addresses).
Comments Received
Public meetings held on September 14 and 16, 1994, provided
opportunities for comments from organizations and the general public on
the tentative positions published in the September 6, 1994, Federal
Register (59 FR 46023). These meetings were attended by 48 non-Federal-
government individuals, representing 27 non-government organizations,
three embassies, one news service, and one private business. Some of
these attendees did not comment, and some followed up their verbal
comments with written statements. Twelve additional organizations
provided only written comments during the comment period on species
proposals.
With respect to proposals on animal listings, 15 non-government
organizations and one private individual provided substantive written
comments, and three additional organizations provided oral comments
only. Most of the animal proposals received comment from at least one
organization. Norway's minke whale proposal (eight comments) and South
Africa's elephant proposal (nine comments) generated the most interest,
followed by the leopard cat, black-crowned crane, Goffin's cockatoo,
and black caiman (five comments each). Although there were few comments
on the box turtle listing proposal from the Netherlands, a similar
proposal from the United States generated considerable public comment.
Written comments on plant species were received from 12
organizations, 17 commercial businesses, five members of Congress, two
foreign governments, one foreign government agency, three specialists
in certain aspects of plants, and over 300 members of the general
public; no organization provided only oral comments. Proposals on
timber-tree species and succulents received the most comments, and no
comments were received regarding orchids and some of the medicinal
species.
The Service has prepared a summary of public comments entitled
``Assessment of Comments on Species Listing Proposals,'' which includes
notes on the negotiating positions of the United States. The separate
development of this document, in keeping with past practice of the
Service, allows for more timely and less expensive publication in the
Federal Register. Although biological and trade information received
from individuals and organizations after the comment period expired is
not referenced in this document, all such information was considered on
the basis of its scientific and/or quantitative merit. The ``Assessment
of Comments on Species Listing Proposals'' is available upon request
from the Office of Scientific Authority.
Summary of Positions
As a consequence of (a) careful review and analysis of public
comments and (b) new information that has become available from a
variety of other sources since publication of tentative positions in
the earlier Federal Register (59 FR 46023), some positions have been
changed. Seven changes involve animal listing proposals. Four of these
(related to tinamous, Udzungwa forest partridge, black-crowned crane,
and black caiman) were made as a result of reviewing new information.
Three (related to the Tanzanian Nile crocodile, tuataras, and Asian
bonytongue fish) were made to clarify the U.S. position in cases where
the original proposals contained ambiguities. Four changes involve
plant listing proposals and were made as a result of receiving new
information on Pachypodium brevicaule, Berberis aristata, Coptis teeta,
and Dactylanthus taylorii.
The negotiating positions presented in the following table are
based upon (a) the best available biological and trade information
available to the Service at this time, (b) the criteria for listing
species in the Appendices (Conf. 1.1 and 1.2 of the first meeting of
the Conference of Parties to the Convention, as interpreted by past
listing discussions and actions of the Parties), and (c) other
provisions for listing species, including Conf. 2.19 on extremely rare
species, Conf. 2.23 and Conf. 3.20 on delistings under special 10-year
review procedures, Conf. 3.15 and 8.22 on ranching, Conf. 5.14 on
uplisting plant species, Conf. 5.21 and 7.14 on special criteria for
the transfer of taxa from Appendix I to Appendix II with concurrent
establishment of export quotas, and Conf. 2.12 and 8.15 on captive-
breeding facilities. Rationale for (and/or commentary on) each current
position is presented in footnotes referenced in the table. In some
cases, only the rationale for a position has changed from that
presented in the previous notice. The bases for some positions,
particularly those that have changed since the previous notice, are
further explained in the separate ``Assessment of Comments on Species
Listing Proposals.''
Although this notice sets forth the negotiating positions of the
United States at COP9, new information that becomes available during a
COP can often lead to modifications in positions. Support or opposition
to particular proposals may depend on whether certain questions about
them are answered satisfactorily at the meeting. At COP9, the U.S.
delegation will disclose all position changes and the rationale for
them.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Species Proposed amendment Proponent U.S. position
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mammals:
Order Chiroptera.............
Acerodon jubatus (Golden- Transfer from II to I........ Philippines............. Support.\1\
capped fruit bat).
Acerodon lucifer (Panay giant Transfer from II to I........ Philippines............. Support.\1\
fruit bat).
Order Edentata...............
Euphractus spp. (Armadillos). Add to II.................... Chile................... Oppose.\2\
Order Pholidota..............
Manis spp. (Pangolins)....... Add to II.................... Switzerland............. Support.\3\
Manis temminckii (Cape Transfer from I to II........ Switzerland............. Support.\4\
pangolin).
Order Rodentia...............
Chinchilla spp. (Chinchillas) Remove from I (domesticated Chile................... Oppose.\5\
specimens in South America).
Order Cetacea................
Balaenoptera acutorostrata Transfer from I to II Norway.................. Oppose.\6\
(Minke whale). (Northeast Atlantic and the
North Atlantic central
stocks).
Order Carnivora..............
Felis bengalensis bengalensis Transfer from I to II........ Switzerland............. Support.\1\,\7\
(Leopard cat).
Hyaena brunnea (Brown hyena). Transfer from I to II........ Switzerland............. Support.\1\
Conepatus spp. (Hog-nosed Add to II.................... Chile................... Oppose.\8\
skunks).
Ailurus fulgens (Red panda).. Transfer from II to I........ Netherlands............. Support.\1\
Order Proboscidea............
Loxodonta africana (African Transfer from I to II (South South Africa............ Under review.\9\
elephant). Africa's population).
Loxodonta africana (African Transfer from I to II Sudan................... Oppose.\10\
elephant). (Sudan's population).
Order Perissodactyla.........
Ceratotherium simum simum Transfer from I to II (South South Africa............ Oppose.\11\
(White rhinoceros). Africa's population).
Order Artiodactyla...........
Megamuntiacus vuguanghensis Add to I..................... Vietnam................. Support.\1\
(Giant muntjac).
Pseudoryx nghetinhensis (Vu Add to I..................... Denmark................. Support.\1\
Quang Ox).
Vicugna vicugna (Vicuna)..... Transfer from I to II Peru.................... Oppose.\12\
(remaining Peruvian Appendix
I populations).
Vicugna vicugna (Vicuna)..... Amend annotation for Appendix Chile................... Support.\13\
II populations to allow the
trade in wool sheared from
live vicun.6as.
Hippopotamus amphibius Add to II.................... Belgium, Benin, and Support.\1\
(Hippopotamus). France.
Birds:
Order Apterygiformes.........
Apteryx spp. (Kiwis)......... Add to I..................... New Zealand............. Support.\1\,\3\
Order Tinamiformes...........
Rhynchotus rufescens Remove from II............... Uruguay................. Support.\4\
maculicollis (Red-winged
tinamou).
Rhynchotus rufescens Remove from II............... Uruguay................. Support.\4\
pallescens (Southern red-
winged tinamou).
Rhynchotus refescens Remove from II............... Uruguay................. Support.\4\
rufescens (Western red-
winged tinamou).
Order Anseriformes...........
Anas aucklandica (currently Transfer from II to I........ New Zealand............. Support.\14\
listed as Anas aucklandica
aucklandica).
Anas chlorotis (currently Transfer from II to I........ New Zealand............. Support.\14\
listed as Anas aucklandica
chlorotis).
Anas nesiotis (currently Retain in I.................. New Zealand............. Support.\14\
listed as Anas aucklandica
nesiotis).
Order Galliformes............
Xenoperdix udzungwensis Add to I..................... Denmark................. Support.\1\
(Udzungwa forest partridge).
Order Gruiformes.............
Balearica pavonina (Black- Transfer II to I............. Netherlands............. Support.\1\,\3\
crowned crane).
Order Psittaciformes.........
Cacatua goffini (Goffin's Transfer from I to II........ Indonesia............... Oppose.\15\
cockatoo).
Eos histrio (Red and blue Transfer from II to I........ Indonesia............... Support.\1\
lory).
Cyanoramphus malherbi (Orange- Transfer from II to I........ New Zealand............. Support.\16\
fronted parakeet).
Cyanoramphus novaezelandiae Transfer I to II............. New Zealand............. Oppose.\17\
(New Zealand or Red-crowned
parakeet).
Psittacus erithacus princeps Transfer from I to II........ United Kingdom.......... Support.\4\
(African gray parrot).
Psittacus erithacus (Sao Tome/ Retain in I in lieu of United Kingdom.......... Support.\18\
Principe populations of Psittacus erithacus princeps.
African gray parrot).
Order Cuculiformes...........
Musophagidae spp. (Turacos).. Add to II.................... Netherlands............. Support.\3\
Order Apodiformes............
Collocalia spp. (Edible-nest Add to II.................... Italy................... Support.\1\
swiftlets).
Order Passeriformes..........
Agelaius flavus (Saffron- Add to I..................... Uruguay................. Support.\1\
cowled blackbird).
Reptiles:
Order Crocodylia.............
Melanosuchus niger (Black Transfer from I to II Ecuador................. Oppose.\19\
caiman). (Ecuador's population
pursuant to Conf. 3.15 on
ranching).
Crocodylus niloticus (Nile Change basis of maintenance Madagascar.............. Oppose.\20\
crocodile). of Malagasy population on II
from Conf. 7.14 to Conf.
3.15.
Crocodylus niloticus (Nile Change basis of maintenance South Africa............ Support.\21\
crocodile). of South Africa's population
on II from Conf. 7.14 to
Conf. 3.15.
Crocodylus niloticus (Nile Transfer from II to I Switzerland............. Support.\22\
crocodile). (Madagascar and Somalia
populations..
Crocodylus niloticus (Nile Maintain in II with Tanzania................ Oppose.\23\
crocodile). significant increase in
export quota pursuant to
Conf. 7.14.
Crocodylus porosus (Saltwater Change basis of maintenance Indonesia............... Oppose.\20\
crocodile). of Indonesia population on
II from Conf. 7.14 to Conf.
3.15.
Crocodylus porosus (Saltwater Transfer from II to I Switzerland............. Support.\22\
crocodile). (Indonesian population).
Crocodylus porosus (Saltwater Change basis of maintenance Australia............... Support.\1\
crocodile). of Australian population on
II from Conf. 3.15 to Conf.
1.2.
Order Testudinata............
Lissemys puncata (Indian flap- Add to II.................... Switzerland............. Support.\1\
shelll turtle).
Lissemys punctata punctata Remove from I................ Switzerland............. Support\4\,\24\
Indian flap-shell turtle).
Terrapene spp. (Box turtles). Add to II (retain T. coahuila Netherlands............. Support.\25\
in I).
Testudo kleinmanni (Egyptian Transfer from II to I........ Egypt................... Support.\26\
tortoise).
Order Rhynchocephalia........ ............................. ........................ ........................
Sphenodon spp. (Tuataras) or Add to I..................... New Zealand............. Support.\27\
Sphenodon guntheri
(Brother's Island tuatara).
Order Sauria................. ............................. ........................ ........................
Phymaturus flagellifer Add II....................... Chile................... Oppose.\2\
(Racerunner lizard).
Pristidactylus alvarol....... Add to II.................... Chile................... Support.\1\
Pristidactylus torquatus..... Add to II.................... Chile................... Support.\1\
Prestidactylus valreiae...... Add to II.................... Chile................... Support.\1\
Pristidactylus volcanensis... Add to II.................... Chile................... Support.\1\
Callopistes palluma.......... Add to II.................... Chile................... Support.\26\
Varanus bengalensis (Indian Transfer from I to II Bangladesh.............. Oppose.\28\
monitor). (Bangaledesh population).
Varanus flavescens (Yellow Transfer from I to II Bangladesh.............. Oppose.\28\
monitor). (Bangladesh population).
Amphibians:
Order Anura.................. ............................. ........................ ........................
Bufo periglenes (Monte Verde Add to I..................... Netherlands............. Support.\29\
or Golden toad).
Mantella aurantiaca (Malagasy Add to I..................... Netherlands and Germany. Support.\26\
golden frog).
Fish:
Order Osteoglossiformes...... ............................. ........................ ........................
Scleropages formosus (Asian Transfer from II to I Indonesia............... Support.\30\
bonytongue). (Indonesian population).
Scleropages formosus (Asian Transfer from II to I Switzerland............. Support.\22\
bonytongue). Indonesian population.
Molluscs:
Charonia tritonis (Giant Add to II.................... Australia............... Support.\1\
triton).
Placostylus spp. (New Zealand Add to II (New Zealand New Zealand............. Support.\1\
flax snails). population).
Powelliphanta spp. (New Add to II (New Zealand New Zealand............. Support.\3\
Zealand land snails). population).
Insects:
Colophon spp. (Cape stage Add to I..................... Netherlands............. Support.\1\
beetles.
Arachnids:
Pandinus dictator (Emperor Add to II.................... Ghana................... Support.\3\
scorpion).
Pandinus gambienis (scorpion) Add to II.................... Ghana................... Support.\3\
Pandinus imperator (scorpion) Add to II.................... Ghana................... Support.\26\
Plants:
Family Apocynaceae........... ............................. ........................ ........................
Pachypodium ambondgenese..... Transfer from II to I........ Madagascar & Switzerland Support.\1\
P. brevicaule................ Transfer from I to II........ Madagascar & Switzerland Oppose.17,31,32)
P. namaquanum................ Transfer from I to II........ Switzerland............. Support.\2\
Family Araceae............... ............................. ........................ ........................
Alocasia sanderiana.......... Remove from II............... Switzerland............. Support.\1\
Family Balanophoraceae....... ............................. ........................ ........................
Dactylanthus taylorii........ Add to I..................... New Zealand............. Support.\33\,\2\
Family Berberidaceae......... ............................. ........................ ........................
Berberis aristata de Candolle Add to II.................... India................... Oppose.\34\,\17\,\31\
Family Cactaceae............. ............................. ........................ ........................
Astrophytum asterias......... Transfer from I to II........ Mexico & Switzerland.... Oppose.\17\
Leuchtenbergia principis..... Transfer from I to II........ Mexico & Switzerland.... Support.\1\
Mammillaria plumosa.......... Transfer from I to II........ Mexico & Switzerland.... Support.\2\
Family Ebenaceae............. ............................. ........................ ........................
Diospyros mun................ Add to II.................... Germany................. Support.\2\
Family Euphorbiaceae......... ............................. ........................ ........................
Euphorbia cremersii.......... Transfer from II to I........ Madagascar & Switzerland Support.\1\
Euphorbia primulifolia....... Transfer from I to II........ Madagascar & Switzerland Oppose.\35\
Family Gentianaceae.......... ............................. ........................ ........................
Gentiana kurroo.............. Add to II.................... India................... Oppose.\17\,\31\,\2\
Family Leguminosae (Fabaceae) ............................. ........................ ........................
Dalbergia melanoxylon........ Add to II.................... Germany; Kenya.......... Support.\2\,\36\
Pterocarpus santalinus....... Add to II.................... India................... Support.\2\,\37\
Family Liliaceae............. ............................. ........................ ........................
Aloe albiflora............... Transfer from II to I........ Madagascar & Switzerland Support.\2\,\38\
Aloe alfredii................ Transfer from II to I........ Madagascar & Switzerland Support.\2\
Aloe bakeri.................. Transfer from II to I........ Madagascar & Switzerland Support.\2\,\38\
Aloe barbadensis (syn. A. Remove from II............... Switzerland............. Under review.\39\
vera [sic]).
Aloe bellatula............... Transfer from II to I........ Madagascar & Switzerland Support.\2\,\38\
Aloe calcairophila........... Transfer from II to I........ Madagascar & Switzerland Support.\2\
Aloe compressa (inc. var. Transfer from II to I........ Madagascar & Switzerland Support.\2\
rugosquamosa and var.
schistophila).
Aloe delphinensis............ Transfer from II to I........ Madagascar & Switzerland Support.\2\
Aloe descoingsii............. Transfer from II to I........ Madagascar & Switzerland Support.\2\,\38\
Aloe fragilis................ Transfer from II to I........ Madagascar & Switzerland Support.\2\
Aloe haworthioides (inc. var. Transfer from II to I........ Madagascar & Switzerland Support.\2\,\38\
aurantiaca).
Aloe helenae................. Transfer from II to I........ Madagascar & Switzerland Support.\2\
Aloe laeta (inc. var. Transfer from II to I........ Madagascar & Switzerland Support.\2\,\38\
maniensis).
Aloe parallelifolia.......... Transfer from II to I........ Madagascar & Switzerland Support.\2\
Aloe parvula................. Transfer from II to I........ Madagascar & Switzerland Support.\2\,\38\
Aloe rauhii.................. Transfer from II to I........ Madagascar & Switzerland Support.\2\,\38\
Aloe suzannae................ Transfer from II to I........ Madagascar & Switzerland Support.\2\,\38\
Aloe versicolor.............. Transfer from II to I........ Madagascar & Switzerland Support.\2\
Colchicum luteum............. Add to II.................... India................... Oppose.\17\,\31\
Family Meliaceae............. ............................. ........................ ........................
Entandrophragma spp.......... Add to II.................... Germany................. Support.\2\,\40\
Khaya spp.................... Add to II.................... Germany................. Support.\2\,\40\
Swietenia macrophylla of the Add to II.................... Netherlands............. Under review.\41\
neotropics, incl. natural
hybrid with S. humilis, and
sic with S. mahagoni.
Family Orchidaceae........... ............................. ........................ ........................
Cattleya skinneri............ Transfer from I to II........ Switzerland & Mexico.... Support.\1\
Cypripedium cordigerum ...... Transfer from II to I........ India................... Oppose.\17\,\31\
Cypripedium elegans.......... Transfer from II to I........ India................... Oppose.\17\,\31\
Cypripedium himalaicum....... Transfer from II to I........ India................... Oppose.\17\,\31\
Cypripedium tibeticum........ Transfer from II to I........ India................... Oppose.\31\
Dendrobium cruentum.......... Transfer from II to I........ Thailand................ Support.\2\,\42\
Didiciea cunninghamii........ Transfer from I to II........ Switzerland............. Support.\1\
Lycaste skinneri var. alba... Transfer from I to II........ Switzerland & Mexico.... Support.\1\
Family Polygonaceae.......... ............................. ........................ ........................
Rheum australe............... Add to II.................... India................... Oppose.\17\,\31\,\2\
Family Ranunculaceae......... ............................. ........................ ........................
Aconitum deinorrhizum........ Add to II.................... India................... Oppose.\2\
Aconitum ferox............... Add to II.................... India................... Oppose.\2\
Aconitum heterophyllum....... Add to II.................... India................... Oppose.\2\
Coptis teeta................. Add to II.................... India................... Oppose.\2\
Family Rosaceae.............. ............................. ........................ ........................
Prunus africana.............. Add to II.................... Kenya................... Support.\1\,\2\
Family Scrophulariaceae...... ............................. ........................ ........................
Picrorhiza kurrooa........... Add to II.................... India................... Oppose.\17\,\31\,\2\
Family Taxaceae.............. ............................. ........................ ........................
Taxus wallichiana............ Add to II.................... India................... Support.\2\,\43\
Family Theaceae.............. ............................. ........................ ........................
Camellia chrysantha.......... Remove from II............... Switzerland............. Support.\1\
Family Thymelaeaceae......... ............................. ........................ ........................
Aquilaria malaccensis (syn. Add to II.................... India................... Support.\2\
A. agallocha).
Family Valerianaceae......... ............................. ........................ ........................
Nardostachys grandiflora..... Add to II.................... India................... Oppose.\17\,\31\,\2\
Parts and Derivatives ............................. Germany................. Support.
Proposal.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
With respect to Appendix II plant taxa replace the standard exclusions:
``tissue cultures and flasked seedling cultures'' with
``seedlings or tissue cultures obtained in vitro in sterile culture media, either liquid or solid, transported
in containers commonly used for these types of cultures, with different shapes and made of different
materials''.
The bases for the final U.S. negotiating positions on the proposals are:
\1\The listing, uplisting, downlisting, or delisting of the taxon, as proposed, appears to be justified by the
biological status and trade information in the proposal or currently available to the Service.
\2\Limited population status and trade information is given, but the United States will give strong
consideration to the statements of range State(s) and looks forward to discussions with them at the COP.
\3\The listing of this taxon, as proposed, appears to be justified by the trade information and/or the
similarity of appearance concern.
\4\Although this proposal was not formally submitted pursuant to the ten-year review resolution for downlisting,
this action appears to be justified under such provisions.
\5\These species of chinchillas are presently listed in Appendix I in South America and are classified as rare,
vulnerable, or endangered by IUCN. Complete removal of protection for captive-bred forms of these species
potentially places wild populations at risk. However, a downlisting of the captive populations in South
America to Appendix II, at least until it is determined that there is no risk to wild forms, would be both
appropriate and consistent with the position of the CITES Standing Committee on proposed changes in listing
criteria (Annex 4).
\6\The United States continues to support the 1978 request from the International Whaling Commission (IWC) to
take all possible measures to support the IWC ban on commercial whaling for certain species and stocks of
whales and opposes the transfer of the minke whale from Appendix I to Appendix II.
\7\The United States will support the position of India (where the status of the subspecies may be more
precarious) that the subspecies remain in Appendix I within india.
\8\Trade and population information is considered insufficient, and neither population status nor trade levels
of species occurring in the United States appears to warrant listing the entire genus. Five species are
identified in Mammals Checklist of the World by Wilson and Reeder (1993) including two (C. leuconotus and C.
mesoleucus) that occur in the southwestern part of the United States. The United States will give strong
consideration to the opinions of range States regarding listing of those species not occurring in the United
States.
\9\The Service believes that, under intensely managed and enforced conditions, consumptive use of African
elephants can be sustainable and, in certain cases, may be a key component of effective conservation
strategies. Rigorous controls on trade are an important part of management. The United States opposes
reopening of the ivory trade and is concerned that the South African proposal as originally submitted did not
appear to eliminate the possibility of legal trade being resumed or of illegal trade being escalated. A Panel
of Experts established under the provisions of Conf. 7.9 is reviewing in country trade controls. The U.S. will
not finalize its position until it has had the opportunity to review the Panel's report in detail along with
any revisions of the proposal submitted by South Africa.
\10\This proposal does not meet trade control provisions outlined in Conf. 7.9.
\11\This proposal would allow legal trade in rhino horn products, albeit with strict in-country controls; such
trade is premature until illegal trade is under control. The United States supports decisions of the Standing
Committee that illegal trade in rhinoceros specimens or product undermines the effectiveness of CITES. The
United States continues to support decisions from previous meetings of the Conference of the Parties and the
Standing Committee regarding rhinoceros conservation and trade in rhinoceros horn. The United States is highly
supportive of efforts by major consumer states to ban the importation and sale of rhinoceros parts and
products and to cooperate in enforcement efforts.
\12\The information received does not demonstrate that Peruvian Appendix II populations subjected to managed
take and trade have fared better than Appendix I populations. Given that, and pending clear demonstration that
sustainable use programs are working, downlisting of Appendix I populations is premature. Trade controls for
wool of Appendix II animals (similar to those proposed by Chile to ensure that illegal wool does not enter
trade) are encouraged and would receive positive consideration.
\13\Export of fiber and re-import of processed fiber would be monitored to control inclusion of illegal fiber in
any significant amount. U.S. support is contingent upon strong assurances that adequate trade controls are in
place and that native communities receive maximum economic incentive to manage Appendix II populations
sustainably.
\14\These entities are considered populations of one species, Anas auklandica, in the current CITES-adopted
check list. By recommending the uplisting of the two subspecies (according to some authorities) currently on
Appendix II, the net result of this proposal is to list the entire species, Anas aucklandica, on Appendix I.
Recommendations of the Nomenclature Committee regarding this proposal will be considered.
\15\The Service is concerned with the methodology used in the study on which this proposal is based and is not
convinced that the resulting population estimates are realistic. In addition, the Service is concerned about
the implications for trade in other island populations of this species.
\16\If a valid taxon, the transfer of Cyanoramphus malherbi to Appendix I seems justified on biological and
trade grounds. However, this ``species'' is now considered to be a color morph of C. auriceps in the CITES-
adopted checklist. Therefore, support will be contingent upon recommendation of the Nomenclature Committee as
to the validity of the listing.
\17\The population-status information is not sufficient to warrant the listing, uplisting, downlisting, or
delisting as proposed.
\18\The Service supports the above proposal submitted by the United Kingdom to downlist Psittacus erithacus
princeps from Appendix I to Appendix II (thereby placing the entire species, P. erithacus, on Appendix II). If
the Parties adopt the above downlisting proposal, the Service understand that the United Kingdom will withdraw
this alternative proposal. However, if the Parties reject the downlisting proposal, the Service will support
the alternative proposal in the interest of clarifying the taxonomy of P. erithacus.
\19\The Service opposes this proposal until (a) effective population monitoring, trade controls, and licensing
procedures are in place, and (b) evidence is presented that the wild population can sustain the initial level
of harvest of eggs and hatchlings proposed for initiating the ranching program.
\20\The Service is concerned about management and enforcement, including but not limited to the considerations
presented in footnote 21.
\21\The transfer of certain crocodilian populations from Appendix I to II was proposed pursuant to Conf. 3.15
(ranching) or Conf. 5.21 and 7.14 (export quota). The Service's initial support of these proposals is
contingent upon assurance that (1) annual and other required reports are being filed regularly by the
proponent with the CITES Secretariat, (2) there is an adequate basis to monitor the status of wild
populations, (3) animals will be returned to the wild in numbers as appropriate, and (4) there is an
implementable limit on the harvest of wild juveniles and adults.
\22\Switzerland, as depositary government, proposed the transfer from Appendix II to Appendix I of those species
that were downlisted from Appendix I to Appendix II under the provisions of Conf. 5.21. If ranching or export
quota proposals are adopted by the Parties, Switzerland will withdraw its proposal for those populations.
\23\The Service opposes expansion of export quotas for wild-harvested animals beyond currently authorized levels
without further justification. The Service agrees with the IUCN Crocodile Specialist Group that Conf. 7.14 is
inappropriate in this case and that wild harvest should be conducted only on a limited basis as ``reasonable
cropping'' in conjunction with ranching programs under Conf. 8.22.
\24\Support for this proposal is conditioned upon the inclusion of the entire species L. punctata in Appendix
II.
\25\The United States submitted a similar proposal for this genus but was able to include more recent
information in its proposal, a copy of which is available from either the Office of Management Authority or
Office of Scientific Authority.
\26\Support for this proposal is based on trade levels and the historical effects of trade on other populations
or the reproductive characteristics of the species. However, the Service will consider any new population
information.
\27\The Service supports the inclusion of Sphenodon spp. (tuataras) as opposed to S. guntheri on Appendix I, but
considers all tuataras to have been included in Appendix I already, based on the present listing of S.
punctatus. The Nomenclature Committee agrees with the latter and recommends that the listing be changed to
Sphenodon spp., now that S. punctatus has been split into more than one species. If the Committee's report is
adopted by the Parties, it will render the New Zealand proposal redundant.
\28\Although this is proposed as a temporary transfer to Appendix II until the next COP, the Service's long-
standing position has been to oppose commercial sale of confiscated specimens of Appendix I species.
\29\The Service would support listing of this taxon in Appendix I on the basis of Conf. 2.19 (i.e., due to the
taxon's rarity, and because any trade in this taxon would be detrimental).
\30\Malaysia has had a captive breeding facility registered for this species in accordance with Article VII
paragraph 4 and pursuant to /conf. 8.15. Indonesia is proposing to register similar facilities but to date
these have not been accepted by the CITES Secretariat. In the absence of the registration of one or more
facilities in Indonesia, this proposal by Indonesia would preclude commercial trade in this species.
Therefore, Indonesia may wish to consider modifying its proposal to continue the present downlisting to
Appendix II pursuant to Conf. 5.21, under which there is an export quota for captive-reared fish and a zero
quota for wild fish.
\31\Trade information is considered insufficient to support the proposal.
\32\The United States recognizes that the downlisting of this species should be linked with the need for an
export quota or sustainable-harvest system, which is expressed in the proposal, the analysis by IUCN, and the
position of the TRAFFIC Network. The United States believes that a management plan and appropriate quota
should be in place before downlisting. This quota should take into account the population structure (including
age structure) of the species, so that there is not excessive pressure to remove the large (and much older)
wild individuals, for which artificially propagated specimens presently do not substitute. Furthermore, the
establishment of artificial propagation program in Madagascar would be an important consideration. Trade of
artificially propagated Appendix I specimens can be facilitated by means of multiple-shipment export permits
that have validity for 6 months and are renewable.
\33\The concern is export of the ``wood-rose'', which the United States believes would be properly included by
listing Dactylanthus taylorii (pua-o-te-reinga) because the wood-rose is an essential derivative of D.
taylorii that is induced by its interaction with its host. Each wood-rose may be completely the substance
(root-tissue) of an individual of several common host trees or shrubs, which has been wholly transformed at
and near the host-Dactylanthus interface by D. taylorii.
\34\Berberis aristata of some authors but not de Candolle is B. chitria and (and/or B. floribunda).
\35\The downlisting of this species is unjustified, because of similar appearance of other dwarf taxa of
subgenus Lacanthis that are in Madagascar and are all in Appendix I. Moreover, no management plan is in place
for the two varieties of this popular species--especially for the less common var. begardii. Trade in
artificially propagated Appendix I specimens can be facilitated by means of multiple-shipment export permits
that have validity for 6 months and are renewable.
\36\The United States will seek amendment of this proposal to exclude the non-African (non-native) population,
and to exclude finished musical instruments. This species is often called African blackwood; although in the
proposal one of the common names mentioned is African ebony, true ebonies--including African ebony--normally
are regarded to be species of Diospyros.
\37\The United States will seek amendment of this proposal to exclude both finished musical instruments and
chemical derivatives.
\38\The United States is tentatively in support of the uplisting all 17 of the Aloe species; however, in an
effort to determine which appendix would provide more net benefit to the wild populations, the United States
is evaluating which of these species can be easily propagated, are readily available as propagated specimens,
and may become less available under Appendix I trade controls [Conf. 5.14(b)(iii)].
\39\The proposal is in error in not treating Aloe barbadensis as a synonym of Aloe vera. The parts and
derivatives of artificially propagated Aloe vera already are not regulated by CITES. The service is
considering whether unregulated trade in whole plants of Aloe vera would place wild populations of threatened
aloes at increased risk.
\40\The listing of this taxon appears to be justified; similarity of appearance also is a concern.
\41\The United States received information regarding this species and its trade at a meeting of the Linnean
Society of London on September 8, 1994. Note that hybrids between Swietenia macrophylla and S. mahagoni are
spontaneous but are not natural hybrids in terms of Conf. 2.13; they sometimes occur where people have
introduced S. macrophylla into proximity with S. mahagoni. If the United States were to support this proposal,
it would want it amended to exclude parts and derivatives other than logs, sawn wood, veneer sheets, and
plywood sheets.
\42\The problem of identification of this species when not in flower is recognized, as the remainder of this
genus of about 900 species would remain in Appendix II.
\43\The United States is evaluating whether to seek an amendment of this proposal to exclude chemical
derivatives (i.e., the end-product medicine).
Future Actions
Amendments are adopted by a two-thirds majority of the Parties
present and voting. All species amendments adopted will enter into
effect 90 days after the close of COP9 (i.e., on February 16, 1995) for
the United States, unless a reservation is entered. Article XV of CITES
enables any Party to exempt itself from implementing CITES for any
particular species, if it enters a reservation with respect to that
species. A Party desiring to enter a reservation must do so during the
90-day period immediately following the close of the meeting at which
the Parties voted to include the species in Appendix I or II. Soon
after COP9, the Service plans to publish a notice in the Federal
Register announcing the final vote of the Parties on these listing
proposals. If the United States should decide to enter any reservation,
this action must be transmitted to the Depositary Government
(Switzerland) by February 16, 1995.
The Service invites comments and recommendations from the public
concerning reservations to be taken by the United States on any
amendments to the appendices adopted by the Parties at COP9. The
Service's past practice has been to solicit public comments only after
the COP, in the notice that announces the actions of the Parties at the
COP on the proposed species amendments. However, because of the short
time available for taking reservations, the Service is now soliciting
comments on possible reservations on any proposed species amendment
that may be adopted. Although the Service will re-solicit comments
after COP9 if time is available, this present notice may be the only
request for such comments. Recommendations or comments regarding
reservations must be received by January 17, 1995. If the United States
should enter any reservations, they will be announced in the same
Federal Register notice that incorporates the listing decisions of the
Parties into the Code of Federal Regulations (50 CFR Part 23).
Reservations, if entered, may do little to relieve importers in the
United States from the need for foreign export permits, because the
Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 (16 U.S.C. 3371 et seq.) make it a Federal
offense to import into the United States any animals taken, possessed,
transported, or sold in violation of foreign conservation laws. If a
foreign country has enacted CITES as part of its positive law, and that
country has not taken a reservation with regard to the animal or plant,
or its parts or derivatives, the United States (even if it had taken a
reservation on a species) would continue to require CITES documents as
a condition of import. Any reservation by the United States would
provide exporters in this country with little relief from the need for
U.S. export documents. Receiving countries that are party to CITES
would generally require CITES-equivalent documentation from the United
States, even if it enters a reservation, because the Parties have
agreed to allow trade with non-Parties (including reserving Parties)
only if they issue documents containing all the information required in
CITES permits or certificates. In addition, if a reservation is taken
on a species listed in Appendix I, the species should still be treated
by the reserving Party as in Appendix II according to Conf. 4.25,
thereby still requiring CITES documents for export of these species.
The United States has never entered a reservation to a CITES listing.
It is the policy of the United States that commercial trade in Appendix
I species for which a country has entered a reservation undermines the
effectiveness of CITES.
This notice was prepared by Drs. Marshall A. Howe, Bruce MacBryde,
and Charles W. Dane, Office of Scientific Authority, under authority of
the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Dated: November 1, 1994.
George T. Frampton, Jr.,
Assistant Secretary for Fish and Wildlife and Parks.
[FR Doc. 94-27731 Filed 11-4-94; 12:20 pm]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
