[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 46 (Wednesday, March 8, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 12400-12425]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-5617]



[[Page 12399]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Part V





Department of the Interior





-----------------------------------------------------------------------



Fish and Wildlife Service



Conference of the Parties to the Convention on International Trade in 
Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES); Eleventh Regular 
Meeting; Proposed U.S. Negotiating Positions for Agenda Items and 
Species Proposals Submitted by Foreign Governments and the CITES 
Secretariat; Public Meeting; Notice

  Federal Register / Vol. 65, No. 46 / Wednesday, March 8, 2000 / 
Notices  

[[Page 12400]]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service


Conference of the Parties to the Convention on International 
Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES); Eleventh 
Regular Meeting; Proposed U.S. Negotiating Positions for Agenda Items 
and Species Proposals Submitted by Foreign Governments and the CITES 
Secretariat; Public Meeting

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice announces the provisional agenda for the eleventh 
regular meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP11) to the 
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna 
and Flora (CITES). The description of each proposed agenda item is 
followed by a brief explanation of the proposed U.S. negotiating 
position for that item. Proposals submitted by the United States are 
not covered in this notice. This notice contains only summaries of the 
proposed U.S. negotiating positions on agenda items, resolutions, and 
species proposals submitted by other countries and the CITES 
Secretariat for COP11. This notice also announces the time and place 
for a public meeting on these issues.

DATES: In developing the final U.S. negotiating positions on these 
issues, we will consider information and comments that you submit if we 
receive them by Friday, March 31, 2000. The public meeting will be held 
on March 13, 2000, from 1:30 to 4:00 pm.

ADDRESSES: Comments: You should send comments pertaining to proposed 
resolutions and agenda items to the Office of Management Authority, 
U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Room 700, 
Arlington, VA 22203, or via E-mail at: [email protected]. You should 
send comments pertaining to species proposals to the Office of 
Scientific Authority, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 North 
Fairfax Drive, Room 750, Arlington, VA 22203, or via E-mail at: 
[email protected]. Comments and materials that we receive will be available 
for public inspection, by appointment, from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday 
through Friday, at either the Office of Management Authority or the 
Office of Scientific Authority.
    Public Meeting: The public meeting will be held in rooms 7000A and 
B, Department of the Interior, 1849 C Street, NW, Washington, D.C. 
Directions to the building can be obtained by contacting the Office of 
Management Authority or the Office of Scientific Authority (see FOR 
FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT, below). Please note that the room is 
accessible to the handicapped, and all persons planning to attend the 
meeting will be required to present photo identification when entering 
the building. Persons planning to attend the meeting who require 
interpretation for the hearing impaired should notify the Office of 
Management Authority as soon as possible.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: (1) For information pertaining to 
proposed resolutions and agenda items: Teiko Saito, Chief, U.S. Fish 
and Wildlife Service, Office of Management Authority, tel. 703-358-
2095, fax 703-358-2298, E-mail at: [email protected]. (2) For 
information pertaining to species proposals: Dr. Susan Lieberman, 
Chief, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Scientific Authority, 
tel. 703-358-1708, fax 703-358-2276, E-mail at: [email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild 
Fauna and Flora, TIAS 8249, referred to below as CITES or the 
Convention, is an international treaty designed to control and regulate 
international trade in certain animal and plant species that are now or 
potentially may be threatened with extinction. These species are listed 
in Appendices to CITES, copies of which are available from the Office 
of Management Authority or the Office of Scientific Authority at the 
above addresses, from our World Wide Website http://
international.fws.gov, or from the official CITES Secretariat Website 
at http://www.cites.org/CITES/eng/index.shtml. Currently, 148 
countries, including the United States, are Parties to CITES. CITES 
calls for biennial meetings of the Conference of the Parties, which 
review issues pertaining to CITES implementation, make provisions 
enabling the CITES Secretariat in Switzerland to carry out its 
functions, consider amendments to the list of species in Appendices I 
and II, consider reports presented by the Secretariat, and make 
recommendations for the improved effectiveness of CITES. Any country 
that is a Party to CITES may propose and vote on amendments to 
Appendices I and II (species proposals), resolutions, decisions, 
discussion papers, and agenda items for consideration by the Conference 
of the Parties. Accredited nongovernmental organizations may 
participate in the meeting as approved observers, and may speak during 
sessions, but may not vote or submit proposals. The eleventh regular 
meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP11) will be held in 
Gigiri, Kenya, April 10-20, 2000.
    This is our sixth in a series of Federal Register notices that, 
together with announced public meetings, provide you with an 
opportunity to participate in the development of the United States' 
negotiating positions for the eleventh regular meeting of the 
Conference of the Parties to CITES (COP11). We published our first 
Federal Register notice on January 30, 1998 (63 FR 4613), and with it 
we requested information and recommendations on potential species 
amendments for the United States to consider submitting for discussion 
at COP11. You may obtain information on that Federal Register notice, 
and on species amendment proposals, from the Office of Scientific 
Authority at the above address. We published our second Federal 
Register notice on September 4, 1998 (63 FR 47316), and with it we 
requested information and recommendations on potential resolutions and 
agenda items for the United States to consider submitting for 
discussion at COP11. You may obtain information on that Federal 
Register notice, and on proposed resolutions and agenda items, from the 
Office of Management Authority at the above address. We published our 
third Federal Register notice on February 26, 1999 (64 FR 9523), and 
with it we announced the time and place of COP11, announced the times 
and places for the next meetings of the CITES Animals and Plants 
Committees, and announced a public meeting to discuss issues that were 
to be raised at those committee meetings. We published our fourth 
Federal Register notice on July 8, 1999 (64 FR 36893), and with it we 
listed potential proposed resolutions, agenda items, and proposed 
amendments to the CITES Appendices that the United States was 
considering submitting for consideration at COP11; invited your 
comments on these potential proposals; announced a public meeting to 
discuss the potential proposals; and provided information on how 
nongovernmental organizations based in the United States can attend 
COP11 as observers. You may obtain information on that Federal Register 
notice from the Office of Management Authority (for information 
pertaining to proposed resolutions and agenda items) or the Office of 
Scientific Authority (for information pertaining to proposed amendments 
to the Appendices) at the above addresses. We

[[Page 12401]]

also published a correction in the Federal Register on August 13, 1999 
(64 FR 44234), correcting a paragraph regarding Atlantic swordfish on 
page 36909 of our July 8 Federal Register notice (64 FR 36893). We 
published our fifth Federal Register notice announcing resolution and 
agenda items and species proposals submitted by the United States to 
COP11 on February 17, 2000 (65 FR 8190). You may locate our regulations 
governing this public process in 50 CFR 23.31-23.39. Before COP11, we 
will announce any changes to the proposed negotiating positions 
contained in this notice and any undecided negotiating positions by 
posting a notice on our Internet website (http://international.fws.gov/
global/cites.html). Pursuant to 50 CFR 23.38 (a), the Director has 
decided to suspend the procedure for publishing a notice of negotiating 
positions in the Federal Register, because time and resources needed to 
prepare a formal Federal Register notice would detract from essential 
preparation for COP11, and because the information on negotiating 
positions will otherwise be available on the internet. After the 
meeting of the COP, we will publish a notice in the Federal Register 
announcing the amendments to CITES Appendices I and II that were 
adopted by the Parties at the meeting, and requesting comments on 
whether the United States should enter reservations on any of these 
amendments.
    We held public meetings on May 6, 1999 (to discuss issues before 
the CITES Animals and Plants Committees), and on July 28, 1999 (to 
discuss species proposals and resolutions and agenda items submitted by 
the United States to COP11). We will discuss U.S. positions on species 
amendments and resolutions submitted by other CITES Parties, and other 
agenda items leading up to COP11, at the public meeting on March 13, 
2000.

Proposed Negotiating Positions

    In this notice we summarize the proposed U.S. negotiating positions 
on agenda items and resolutions and proposals to amend the Appendices, 
which have been submitted by other countries and the CITES Secretariat. 
(Proposals submitted by the United States are covered in the Federal 
Register notice of February 17, 2000 [65 FR 8190]; see Background, 
above. We will not cover those issues in this notice. If time permits, 
they can be discussed at the public meeting on March 13, 2000). 
Numerals next to each agenda item or resolution correspond to the 
numbers used in the provisional agenda (Doc. 11.3), posted on the CITES 
Secretariat's Internet website (http://www.cites.org) and distributed 
through CITES Notification to the Parties No. 1999/96, issued on 
November 30, 1999. However, when we completed this notice, we still had 
not received documents for a number of the agenda items and resolutions 
from the Secretariat, nor have they been posted on the Secretariat's 
website. They will be available from the Office of Management Authority 
after they have been received from the Secretariat, or you may obtain 
them directly from the Secretariat's website when they are posted.
    Some documents may not be received or posted until COP11 begins on 
April 10, 2000, or later during the Conference. A list of documents 
that we have received is available upon request from the Office of 
Management Authority (see ADDRESSES, above).
    In the discussion that follows below, we have included a brief 
description of each proposed resolution, agenda item, or species 
proposal submitted by other countries or the CITES Secretariat, 
followed by a brief explanation of the proposed U.S. negotiating 
position for that item. Before COP11, we will announce any changes to 
the proposed negotiating positions contained in this notice and any 
undecided negotiating positions by posting a notice on our Internet 
website (http://international.fws.gov/global/cites.html). However, new 
information that may become available at COP11 could lead to 
modifications of these positions. The U.S. delegation will fully 
disclose any and all position changes and the explanations for those 
changes through daily public briefings at COP11.

Agenda (provisional) [Doc. 11.3]

Opening Ceremony and Welcoming Addresses

    The Secretariat will prepare a document on these agenda items. 
According to tradition the host country conducts an opening ceremony 
and makes welcoming remarks at a meeting of the COP. Since COP11 is 
being hosted by the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP), not 
the Government of Kenya, we understand that the opening ceremony and 
welcoming remarks will be conducted by UNEP.

Strategic and Administrative Matters

1. Rules of Procedure [Doc. 11.1]
    The Secretariat, on behalf of the Standing Committee, distributes a 
provisional version of the Rules of Procedure, which describe the 
manner in which a COP is conducted, prior to all CITES COPs. The CITES 
Standing Committee may recommend modification to the Rules of Procedure 
for the work of the meeting of the COP. However, the COP discusses 
those proposed modifications, if any, and adopts Rules that guide the 
work of the Conference for the 2 weeks that it meets. Following COP 10, 
the Management Authority of Spain, with the cooperation of the CITES 
Secretariat, prepared a draft revision of portions of the Rules of 
Procedure. The United States prepared comments on this draft revision 
in preparation for the 42nd meeting of the Standing Committee, in 
Lisbon, September 28-October 1, 1999. At this meeting the Standing 
Committee reviewed the draft Rules of Procedure and made several 
significant proposed additions to the rules before agreeing that they 
should be forwarded to COP11 for adoption. One significant addition 
would provide the possibility for unofficial documents to be circulated 
at the COP and would give the Bureau the right to decide on appropriate 
action in the case of complaints from participants. Another significant 
proposed modification would establish a ``dispute resolution'' 
procedure, giving the Bureau authority to expel from the meeting any 
participant that ``vilifies'' a Party or brings the Convention into 
``disrepute.'' The United States has noted previously our preference 
(U.S. response to Notification to the Parties 1998/18) that, on a 
species proposal or other issues before the Conference, the use of a 
secret ballot should be more restrictive than the current provision in 
Rule 25. However, in the interest of building consensus, we do not 
intend to propose any modifications to Rule 25.
    The United States proposes to support most aspects of the 
provisional version of the Rules of Procedure as received from the 
Secretariat, with the following exceptions: Rule 12, paragraph 1, would 
allow a simple majority of the Parties present and voting to close from 
the public any session of the plenary or Committee I or II. This rule 
is in contrast to the rules that were in effect at COP 10, which 
allowed such action only ``in exceptional circumstances,'' and only 
with a two-thirds majority vote of Parties present and voting. The 
United States feels that transparency of the CITES process at a COP is 
of the utmost importance and would not support any effort to 
potentially reduce that transparency.
    In Rule 29, the language in paragraph 3 allows significant 
interpretation in determining what ``abuses or vilifies a party, or 
brings the Convention into disrepute.'' Clear guidelines should be 
established for use in determining if a document is offensive, since 
this

[[Page 12402]]

determination could ultimately result in an organization being refused 
admission to the COP, or a formal complaint being made to a Party. In 
addition, the language in paragraph 4 that enables the Bureau to decide 
on appropriate action appears to be in conflict with Article XI 
paragraph 7 of the treaty that states that the Conference of the 
Parties is the body that can object to the participation of observers. 
The authority rests within the Plenary of the COP to decide if an 
individual observer should be no longer admitted to the meeting. One of 
the great strengths of CITES is its explicit provisions for observer 
participation.
2. Election of Chairman and Vice-Chairmen of the meeting and of 
Chairmen of Committees I and II and of the Budget Committee [no 
document]
    The Secretariat will not prepare a document for this agenda item. 
The United States will support the election of a highly qualified 
Conference Chair, Vice-Chair of the Conference, and Committee Chairs 
representing the geographic diversity of CITES.
    The Chair of the CITES Standing Committee (United Kingdom) will 
serve as temporary Chair of the meeting of the COP until a permanent 
Conference Chair is elected. According to tradition the host country 
provides the Conference Chair. Since there is no host country, the 
Standing Committee and UNEP will jointly recommend a suitable Chair to 
the Conference of the Parties. The Conference Chair will serve as 
Presiding Officer of the meeting of the COP and also of the Conference 
Bureau, the executive body that manages the business of the COP. Other 
members of the Conference Bureau include the Committee Chairs 
(discussed below), the members of the Standing Committee, and the 
Secretary General of CITES.
    The major technical work of CITES is done in the two simultaneous 
Committees, thus, Committee Chairs must have great technical knowledge 
and skill. In addition, CITES benefits from active participation and 
leadership of representatives of every region of the world. The United 
States will support the election of Committee Chairs and a Vice-Chair 
of the Conference having the required technical knowledge and skills 
and also reflecting the geographic and cultural diversity of CITES 
Parties.
3. Adoption of the Agenda [Doc. 11.3]
    The United States has reviewed the Provisional Agenda provided by 
the CITES Secretariat for COP11. The United States' discussion paper 
``Recognition of the important contribution made by observers to the 
CITES process at meetings of the Conference of the Parties,'' which was 
submitted for consideration in Plenary session under agenda item #7 
(Admission of Observers), has instead been assigned under a separate 
agenda item (#16), causing its consideration to be delayed by 2 days 
and limiting its initial audience to Committee II. The United States' 
discussion paper includes six recommendations which, if adopted by the 
Parties, would ensure the active participation of observers at future 
meetings of the Conference of the Parties. For many of the issues 
submitted for discussion at meetings of the COP, the greatest level of 
expertise lies within the community of nongovernmental organizations 
(NGOs) that attends meetings of the COP as observers. CITES recognizes 
this fact by explicitly providing for the active participation of 
observers at meetings of the COP in Article XI. Given the importance of 
observers, and in light of the difficulties they encountered while 
attempting to actively participate at COP10, the United States believes 
all policy documents concerning observers should be considered on the 
first working day of the meeting of the COP in Plenary. The United 
States recently wrote to the Secretariat to ask why that discussion 
paper was not scheduled for consideration under agenda item 7, as the 
United States had originally requested. If the United States does not 
receive a satisfactory response from the Secretariat and the matter 
remains unresolved, the United States may decide to oppose this aspect 
of the provisional agenda when it comes up for consideration at COP11.
4. Adoption of the Working Programme [Doc. 11.4]
    The United States has received and continues to review the 
Provisional Working Programme for COP11 provided by the Secretariat. 
The United States generally supports the Provisional Working Programme, 
however, the United States is concerned that the discussion paper that 
the United States submitted on observers (see agenda item #3, above) 
has not been assigned as an earlier agenda item of the Provisional 
Agenda for COP11. In addition, the United States notes that on the 
afternoon of April 12th, Committee I is scheduled to consider agenda 
items regarding marine species, while Committee II is scheduled to 
consider interpretation and implementation of the Convention as it 
relates to the issuance of certificates of introduction from the sea. 
The United States is concerned that considering these issues 
simultaneously in different committees may present a scheduling 
conflict for many Parties, as their staff who cover marine species 
would probably also cover issues associated with certificates of 
introduction from the sea. The United States believes this scheduling 
conflict could be averted by changing the order in which Committee II 
considers its agenda items that afternoon, moving introduction from the 
sea to the final item for consideration.
5. Establishment of the Credentials Committee [no document]
    A document will not be prepared by the CITES Secretariat on this 
agenda item. The United States will support the establishment of the 
Credentials Committee.
    The establishment of the Credentials Committee is a standardized 
matter. The Credentials Committee approves the credentials of delegates 
to the meeting of the COP by confirming that they are official 
representatives of their governments, giving them the right to vote in 
Committee and Plenary sessions. The Credentials Committee consists of 
representatives from no more than five CITES Party governments 
nominated by the Standing Committee. The United States was a member of 
the Credentials Committee at COP10.
6. Report of the Credentials Committee [no pre-meeting document]
    The Secretariat will not prepare a document on this agenda item 
prior to COP11, but one will be available at the Conference. The United 
States will support adoption of the report of the Credentials Committee 
if it does not recommend the exclusion of legitimate representatives of 
countries that are Parties to CITES. The United States will encourage 
timely production of Credentials Committee reports at the meeting of 
the COP.
    Adoption of the report of the Credentials Committee is generally a 
standardized exercise. Representatives whose credentials are not in 
order should be given observer status as provided for under Article XI 
of the Convention. If evidence is provided that credentials are 
forthcoming but have been delayed, representatives can be allowed to 
vote on a provisional basis. A liberal interpretation of the Rules of 
Procedure on credentials should be adhered to in order to permit 
clearly legitimate representatives to participate. Exclusion of Party 
representatives whose credentials are not in order could undermine 
essential cooperation among Parties. However, greater vigilance is 
necessary in cases of close votes, or decisions to be made by secret 
ballot.

[[Page 12403]]

7. Admission of Observers [Doc. 11.7]
    When we completed this notice, we still had not received a document 
on this agenda item from the Secretariat. The United States supports 
admission to the meeting of all technically qualified nongovernmental 
organizations, and the United States opposes unreasonable limitations 
on their full participation as observers at COP11. Nongovernmental 
organizations (NGOs) are admitted as observers if their headquarters 
are located in a CITES Party country, and if the national government of 
that country approves their attendance at the meeting of the COP. 
International NGOs are admitted by approval of the CITES Secretariat. 
After being approved as an observer, an NGO is admitted to the meeting 
of the COP, unless one-third of the Parties present objects.
    Nongovernmental organizations representing a broad range of 
viewpoints and perspectives play a vital and important role in CITES 
activities and have much to offer to the debates and negotiations at a 
meeting of the COP. Their participation is specifically provided by 
Article XI of the Convention. The United States supports the 
opportunity for all technically qualified observers to fully 
participate at meetings of the COP, as is standard CITES practice. The 
United States also supports flexibility and openness in approval of 
documents produced by nongovernmental organizations and the 
dissemination of these documents to delegates. This information sharing 
is vital to decision-making and scientific and technical understanding 
at a CITES meeting.
8. Matters Related to the Standing Committee
    The Standing Committee directs the work of the Convention during 
the period between meetings of the COP. Its work includes: (1) 
providing general policy and operational direction to the CITES 
Secretariat concerning the budget and other matters; (2) providing 
coordination and advice to other CITES Committees and working groups; 
(3) drafting resolutions for the Parties to consider at meetings of the 
COP; and (4) carrying out activities on behalf of the Parties. The 
Standing Committee will meet on April 9, 2000, the day before COP11 
begins, to nominate the chairs of COP committees and provide guidance 
needed to conduct the meeting of the COP.

1. Report of the Chairman [Doc. 11.8]

    When we completed this notice, we still had not received a document 
for this agenda item from the Secretariat. The United States fully 
supports the presentation of a report by the Chairman of the Standing 
Committee (United Kingdom) regarding the execution of the Committee's 
responsibilities and its activities that accurately reflects the 
discussions and decisions of the Committee. The United States will 
develop a position on that report after receipt of the document.

2. Election of new regional and alternate regional members [no 
document]

    The Parties are represented on the Standing Committee by region. 
Regions with many countries may have more than one representative, 
based on a formula approved by resolution at previous meetings of the 
COP. Of the six geographic regions, one has three representatives 
(Africa); three have two representatives (South/Central America and the 
Caribbean, Europe, and Asia); and two have one representative (North 
America and Oceania). Parties from each geographic region meet early 
during the meeting of the COP to select new regional representative(s) 
and alternates to the Standing, Animals, and Plants Committees, in 
addition to reviewing other issues.
    The United States encourages membership that will continue the 
active role of the Standing Committee. The Regional Representative for 
North America from COP9 until now has been Mexico. Discussions have 
taken place among the three North American CITES Parties (Canada, 
Mexico, and the United States) on which country should be the regional 
representative between COP11 and COP12, and those discussions will 
continue and be finalized at COP11. Resolution Conf. 9.1 (Rev.) 
specifies that ``the terms of office of the regional members shall 
commence at the close of the regular meeting at which they are elected 
and shall expire at the close of the second regular meeting 
thereafter.''
9. Reports of the Secretariat
1. Annual report of the Secretariat [Doc. 11.9.1]
2. Staffing of the Secretariat [Doc. 11.9.2]

    These two reports are essential to ensure that the Secretariat 
continues to perform its functions assigned under Article XII of CITES. 
However, when we completed this notice, we still had not received these 
documents from the Secretariat. When we receive these documents from 
the Secretariat, the United States will evaluate them and develop 
negotiating positions.
10. Financing and Budgeting of the Secretariat and of Meetings of the 
Conference of the Parties
    The Secretariat submits its financial report and budget for 
approval at each meeting of the COP. The Parties may choose to modify 
the budget before approving it. Financial support for the Secretariat 
comes from a Trust Fund consisting of voluntary annual contributions 
from Party governments, based on a United Nations scale. Additional 
support for CITES activities is provided through extra contributions 
from governments and nongovernmental organizations, and is used for 
projects approved by the Standing Committee. This ``external funding'' 
is not part of the Secretariat's budget.
    The United States is currently reviewing the budget documents of 
the Secretariat. The United States advocates fiscal responsibility and 
accountability on the part of the Secretariat and the Conference of the 
Parties. The United States plans to be an active participant in 
discussions in the Budget Committee at COP11.

1. Financial report for 1997, 1998 and 1999 [Doc. 11.10.1]

    Issues associated with the financial report of the Secretariat will 
be fully discussed at COP11, and the United States will closely review 
and analyze the relevant documents.

2. Estimated expenditures for 2000 [Doc. 11.10.2]

    Issues associated with anticipated 2000 expenditures of the 
Secretariat will be fully discussed at COP11. The United States will 
review the documents carefully, bearing in mind the need to balance 
tasks assigned to the Secretariat with available resources.

3. Budget for 2001-2002 and Medium-term Plan for 2001-2005 [Doc. 
11.10.3]

    The United States believes that coordinating Budget Committee 
discussions with discussions in Committees I and II that may have 
budgetary implications is important. The Budget Committee needs to have 
time to consider the financial and budgetary implications of 
resolutions approved by Committees I and II. Ideally, the Committees 
would not take decisions with budgetary implications until the budget 
is approved. The United States will continue to work through the Bureau 
at the meeting of the COP to deal with this issue. The United States 
believes that the Budget Committee should be in a stronger position to 
deal with these important issues if the meeting of the COP approves the 
new status of the Budget

[[Page 12404]]

Committee, reporting directly to the meeting of the COP as a full 
committee of the plenary.

4. External funding [Doc. 11.10.4]

    External funding refers to the financial support by Parties and 
nongovernmental organizations for projects that have been approved as 
priorities for CITES by the Standing Committee. This procedure is 
designed to avoid any conflicts of interest or even the appearance of a 
conflict when approving projects and channeling funds between the 
provider and the recipient. These externally funded projects are 
outside the CITES Trust Fund.
    The United States, through the Department of the Interior and the 
Department of State, continues to contribute external funding to 
Standing Committee-approved projects including delegate travel to the 
meeting of the COP, support for Committee meetings, CITES enforcement 
and implementation training, and biological studies of significantly 
traded species.
11. Committee Reports and Recommendations
1. Animals Committee
(a) Report of the Chairman [Doc. 11.11.1]

    The current Chair (Mr. Robert Jenkins of Australia) will report on 
the activities of the Animals Committee since COP10. Since COP10, the 
Animals Committee held two meetings, the first (May 25-29, 1998) in 
Caracas, Venezuela, and the second (July 5-9, 1999) in Antananarivo, 
Madagascar. The Regional Representative from North America on the 
Animals Committee is Dr. Susan Lieberman of our Office of Scientific 
Authority, who has led the U.S. delegations to each of the Animals 
Committee meetings since COP10. The United States is an active 
participant in Animals Committee meetings, working groups, and 
activities. When we completed this notice, we still had not received a 
copy of the Chair's Report. You may obtain information regarding 
Animals Committee meetings from the Office of Scientific Authority at 
the address above (see For Further Information Contact).

(b) Election of new regional and alternate regional members [no 
document]

    The six CITES regions are represented on the Animals Committee by 
one or two persons, according to the number of countries in each 
region. This process was established in CITES Resolution Conf. 9.1 
(Rev), which is available on the Secretariat's web page. The 
representatives are individuals, and not governments. Parties within 
each CITES region meet during the meeting of the COP to elect new 
Animals Committee members to represent them. The current North American 
regional representative on the Animals Committee is Dr. Susan 
Lieberman, Chief of our Office of Scientific Authority, on behalf of 
the United States. Dr. Lieberman also serves as Vice Chair of the 
Committee. The United States, Mexico, and Canada have discussed our 
representation for the interval between COP11 and COP12, and we will 
meet and finalize the region's selections for representative and 
alternate during the first week of COP11.

2. Plants Committee
(a) Report of the Chairman [Doc. 11.11.2]

    The current Chair (Dr. Margarita Clemente of Spain) will report on 
the activities of the Plants Committee since COP10. Since COP10, the 
Plants Committee held two meetings: the eighth meeting of the Plants 
Committee (November 3-7, 1997) was in Pucon, Chile, and the ninth 
meeting (June 7-11, 1999), in Darwin, Australia. The United States sent 
a delegation to both of those Plants Committee meetings and has 
participated actively in Plants Committee activities. When we completed 
this notice, we still had not received a copy of the Chair's Report. 
You may obtain information regarding the Plants Committee from the 
Office of Scientific Authority at the address above (see For Further 
Information Contact).

(b) Election of new regional and alternate regional members [no 
document]

    The six CITES regions are represented on the Plants Committee by 
one or two persons, according to the number of countries in each 
region. This process was established in CITES Resolution Conf. 9.1 
(Rev), which is available on the Secretariat's web page. The 
representatives are individuals, and not governments. Party countries 
within each CITES region meet during the meeting of the COP to elect 
new Plants Committee members to represent them. The current North 
American regional representative on the Plants Committee is Dr. 
Bertrand von Arx, on behalf of Canada. The United States, Mexico, and 
Canada have discussed our representation for the interval between COP11 
and COP12 and will meet and finalize the region's selections for 
representative and alternate during the first week of COP11.

3. Identification Manual Committee [Doc. 11.11.3]

    The Identification Manual Committee develops materials, such as 
manuals and data sheets, to help CITES Parties identify CITES-listed 
species. The current Chair is Dr. Ruth Landolt of Liechtenstein; the 
current Vice-chair is Dr. Chris Schurmann of the Netherlands. The 
report highlights those countries that have not yet submitted the 
required identification sheets under Resolution Conf. 9.1. The United 
States will attempt to fulfill this requirement after COP11. However, 
we are also actively involved in other identification efforts, and the 
publication of other more interactive or useful identification 
materials. We will continue to focus our identification efforts and 
limited resources on the production of materials most useful to our 
Wildlife Inspectors and Customs Inspectors and other enforcement 
personnel in the United States and abroad.

4. Nomenclature Committee

    The Nomenclature Committee reviews nomenclature (scientific name) 
and taxonomic (scientific classification) issues that apply to species 
listed in the CITES Appendices. The Committee also prepares and adopts 
checklists for the various taxa (classifications) listed in the CITES 
Appendices.

(a) Report of the Chairmen [Doc. 11.11.4.1]

    The Nomenclature Committee does not have regional representatives 
and meets only as needed, usually during the meetings of the Plants and 
Animals Committee. The United States participates in all activities of 
the Nomenclature Committee. The current Co-chairs are Dr. Marinus 
Hoogmoed (of the Scientific Authority of the Netherlands) for fauna 
(animals), and Dr. Noel McGough (of the Scientific Authority of the 
United Kingdom) for flora (plants). Drs. Hoogmoed and McGough have 
submitted their report for consideration at COP11 in this document. We 
note with praise the excellent work of Drs. Hoogmoed and McGough on all 
of these issues. For fauna, the report details several notable 
enquiries from the Parties on nomenclatural issues, along with 
recommendations for standard references for the following groups 
(taxa): crocodiles, turtles, tortoises, and tuataras; chamaeleons; 
Cordylid lizards; and fishes. For flora, the report summarizes existing 
checklists and a proposed work plan for the families Cactaceae, 
Orchidaceae, and Euphorbiaceae, various bulb genera, carnivorous 
plants, and the genera Aloe and Pachypodium.

(b) Recommendations of the Committee [Doc. 11.11.4.2]


[[Page 12405]]


    This document contains recommendations of the Nomenclature 
Committee, as discussed in Doc. 11.11.4.1. We are still reviewing the 
budgetary requests and standard references (proposed in Doc. 11.39). We 
have not fully evaluated all of these taxonomic references. However, 
the United States tentatively proposes to support their adoption, 
pending input during this public comment process. We invite the review 
of these reports by experts in these taxa. The United States proposes 
to support all of the recommended annotations to and nomenclatural 
changes in the Appendices in the report (names used for wild 
populations of Bos garus and Bos mutus, names for genera of chameleons, 
names for species of Tupinambis, and Brachypelma nomenclature).
12. Evolution of the Convention
1. Action plan to improve the effectiveness of the Convention [Doc. 
11.12.1]

    Document SC.42.7, prepared by the Secretariat, is a report of 
actions taken to implement the Decisions in the Action Plan adopted by 
COP10. The report, which was presented and discussed at the 42nd 
meeting of the Standing Committee (SC42), held in late September 1999 
in Portugal, addresses all the issues related to the ``Action Plan,'' 
including those directed to the Conference of the Parties, the Parties, 
the Animals and Plants Committees, UNEP, and the Secretariat.
    At SC42, the Committee recommended that the Secretariat continue 
its work on refining the document, taking into consideration the 
comments made during the SC42. When we completed this notice, we still 
had not received the document for this agenda item from the 
Secretariat. When we receive the document from the Secretariat, the 
United States will evaluate it and develop a negotiating position.
    Although when we completed this notice we still had not received 
the refined document from the Secretariat for this agenda item, the 
United States supports the activities and recommendations that were 
described in Document SC.42.7, and we anticipate that the United States 
will support its adoption by the Parties.

2. Strategic Plan for the Convention [Doc. 11.12.2]

    At the 42nd meeting of the Standing Committee, the Draft Strategic 
Plan (SC42.5, Annex 1) was presented for discussion. The Draft 
Strategic Plan presents a long-range vision focused on broad goals and 
objectives to guide the Parties in achieving CITES' mission. The 
comments prepared by the Animals and Plants Committees (Annex 2 and 3, 
respectively) were also made available for review and comment. The 
Working Group revised the Draft Plan during SC42, taking into 
consideration the comments made by the Animals and Plants Committees, 
in addition to those from delegates and observers. Doc. SC.42.5 Annex 1 
(Rev.) was presented and approved by the Standing Committee for 
circulation to the Parties. The Standing Committee also agreed that the 
Strategic Plan Working Group should continue its work on refining the 
document.
    After the meeting, the Secretariat on behalf of the Standing 
Committee distributed to the Parties Doc. SC.42.5 Annex 1 (Rev.) in 
addition to a draft Action Plan to implement the goals and objectives 
identified in the Strategic Plan (Notification to the Parties No. 1999/
76, issued on October 21, 1999). The Working Group met in early 
December to further refine the Strategic Plan as well as the Action 
Plan based on comments received from the Parties in response to the 
Notification. When we completed this notice, we still had not received 
the documents from the Secretariat for this agenda item. However, the 
United States as Chair of the Working Group, strongly supports the 
goals and objectives in the Strategic Plan and supplemental Action Plan 
and will work towards their adoption at COP11.

3. Co-operation and synergy with the Convention on Biological Diversity 
and other biodiversity-related conventions [Doc. 11.12.3]

    At the 42nd meeting of the Standing Committee Doc. SC.42.17 
(``Synergy Between the Biodiversity-related Conventions and Relations 
With Other Organizations'') was prepared by the Secretariat, discussed, 
and noted. When we completed this notice, we still had not received the 
document for this agenda item from the Secretariat. Once we receive it, 
we will develop a negotiating position.

4. Improvement of the effectiveness of the Convention: financing 
conservation of species of wild fauna and flora [Doc. 11.12.4]

    The Government of France has submitted this draft Resolution on 
financing the conservation of wild species. However, when we completed 
this notice, we still had not received the official translation of this 
document from the Secretariat. Once we receive the official 
translation, the United States will develop a negotiating position.
13. Terms of Reference of Permanent Committees [Doc. 11.13]
    At its 42nd meeting, the Standing Committee formally requested the 
Secretariat to review the terms of reference of existing inter-
sessional Committees and to submit proposals to the Parties at COP11 
regarding the structure, remit, and resources of each Committee, 
consistent with the goals and objectives of the CITES Strategic Plan, 
and allowing sufficient flexibility for the operation of each 
Committee. We expect Doc. 11.13 to cover this issue. Once we receive 
this document from the Secretariat, the United States will develop a 
negotiating position.
14. Synergy with the United Nations Food and Agricultural Organization 
[Doc. 11.14]
    This document was sponsored by the United States, and our reason 
for submitting it is discussed in the Federal Register notice of 
February 17, 2000 [65 FR 8190]. The United States will work for 
adoption of the document and its recommendation by the Parties.
15. International Whaling Commission
1. Relationship with the International Whaling Commission [ Doc. 
11.15.1]

    If adopted, this resolution would direct CITES to make decisions 
regarding international trade in whales and whale products under 
``their own criteria set forth in Conf. 9.24, taking into account (i) 
scientific information from the IWC Scientific Committee and other 
sources and (ii) consistency with scientific requirements for the 
listing of other species in the Appendixes [sic].'' The United States 
notes that this is a requirement of the treaty and needs no 
reinforcement from a resolution. The United States also notes that the 
criteria include not only the biological status of candidate species, 
but also other elements, e.g., the measures specified in paragraph 2 of 
Annex 4 of Resolution 9.24. Thus, according to Annex 4 of its own 
criteria, CITES should consider the IWC's progress on management 
measures in making decisions on Appendix listings.
    The draft resolution also ``urges that the Parties apply the 
provisions for international trade in listed species as laid down in 
the Convention.'' This is also an obligation of all Parties to the 
Convention and, thus, this part of the resolution is also unnecessary.
    Because the operative parts of this resolution call on the Parties 
to do things that are already requirements of the implementation of 
CITES, the United States opposes this resolution.

[[Page 12406]]

    In addition, the United States has noticed an error in Doc. 
11.15.1. The sixth preambulatory paragraph reads as follows:
    Noting that a resolution, adopted at the 51st annual meeting of the 
IWC held in May 1999 in Grenada by 15 votes in favor, 10 votes against 
and 9 abstentions, objected for the time being the downlisting of any 
whales because the moratorium was still in effect;
    Page 36 of the Chairman's Report of the 51st Annual Meeting (IWC, 
1999) indicates that the resolution passed by a far wider margin, 
specifically stating, ``The resolution . . . was then adopted, with 21 
votes in favour, 10 against and 3 abstentions.''
    The United States has drawn the attention of the CITES Secretariat 
to this error and requested that corrected text be sent to the Parties.
    The United States believes that CITES should honor the request for 
assistance in enforcing the moratorium on commercial whaling, which was 
communicated by the IWC to CITES in 1978. This request was answered by 
the CITES Parties in Resolution Conf. 2.9, which calls on the Parties 
to ``agree not to issue any import or export permit or certificate'' 
for introduction from the sea under CITES for primarily commercial 
purposes ``for any specimen of a species or stock protected from 
commercial whaling by the International Convention for the Regulation 
of Whaling.'' These complementary actions established a strong 
relationship between the two organizations, whereby CITES has agreed to 
reflect IWC decisions in its Appendices. The United States has proposed 
a resolution (Doc. 11.15.2) that encourages the continued cooperation 
between CITES and the IWC. The United States prefers this approach to 
the issue.

2. Reaffirmation of the synergy between CITES and the International 
Whaling Commission [Doc. 11.15.2]

    This document was submitted by the United States, and our reason 
for submitting it is discussed in the Federal Register notice of 
February 17, 2000 [65 FR 8190]. The United States will work for 
adoption of the document.
16. Recognition of the important contribution made by observers to the 
CITES process at meetings of the Conference of the Parties [Doc. 11.16]
    This document is a discussion paper submitted by the United States, 
and our proposed negotiating position is discussed in the Federal 
Register notice of February 17, 2000 [65 FR 8190]. The United States 
will work for adoption of the document and its recommendations by the 
Parties.

Interpretation and Implementation of the Convention

17. Consolidation of Valid Resolutions [Doc. 11.17]
    This resolution includes the work of the Secretariat to consolidate 
existing Resolutions and Decisions of the Conference of the Parties on 
conservation of cetaceans, trade in cetacean specimens and relationship 
with the International Whaling Commission, enforcement and compliance; 
and non-commercial loan, donation or exchange of museum and herbarium 
specimens. This work was mandated by Decision 10.60.
    Conservation of cetaceans--The United States notes that since the 
Standing Committee is obligated to do this consolidation, comments by 
some Parties that this consolidation effort should not be forwarded to 
the Conference of the Parties were ruled out of order. Two draft 
consolidated resolutions have been presented--a draft consolidated 
resolution that includes the original text and preamble of the 
resolutions, without textual changes, and a revised version of the 
draft consolidated resolution proposed by the Secretariat that takes 
the comments of some Parties into account. The choice is between the 
two resolutions. The United States is continuing to discuss this 
consolidation effort both internally and with other Parties in 
developing our proposed negotiating position.
    We support the consolidation of various enforcement resolutions, 
and see no substantive changes or negative effects from the proposed 
consolidation of the enforcement resolutions.
    When we completed this notice, we still had not received a document 
on this agenda item from the Secretariat. We are continuing to review 
the sections (3 and 3b) on the consolidation of resolutions concerning 
non-commercial loan, donation, or exchange of museum and herbarium 
specimens. At the 42nd meeting of the Standing Committee we supported 
the consolidation of resolutions and still do, provided the new version 
is ``user friendly'' and does not ``impinge on the validity'' of 
existing resolutions.
18. Interpretation and Implementation of Article III, Paragraph 5, 
Article IV, Paragraphs 6 and 7 and Article XIV, Paragraphs 4, 5 and 6, 
Relating to Introduction From the Sea [Doc. 11.18]
    Australia submitted a resolution to provide a practical basis for 
implementing CITES when listed species are taken on the high seas 
outside the jurisdiction of any country. The Convention refers to this 
as ``introduction from the sea,'' but is silent on how Parties should 
specifically implement trade controls in such situations. The 
Australian resolution clarifies the term ``introduction from the sea,'' 
recommends a number of measures to assist Parties in the monitoring of 
trade in listed marine species, and suggests appropriate standards for 
documenting specimens that enter trade from areas not controlled by any 
country. The resolution addresses provisions of Article XIV concerning 
the relationship between the Convention and other related international 
agreements that entered into force before CITES went into effect and 
requests that Parties submit information in their annual reports about 
specimens introduced from the sea under Article XIV. The resolution 
incorporates the current provisions of Resolution Conf. 10.2 on permits 
and certificates and Resolution Conf. 9.7 on transit and transhipment.
The resolution directs the Secretariat to develop an appropriate 
mechanism to accurately record transactions involving specimens that 
are introduced from the sea and requests that the Secretariat, working 
with the Animals Committee and relevant intergovernmental fisheries 
organizations, monitor implementation of the measures of the 
resolution. To ensure effective international cooperation and achieve 
effective implementation of the resolution, the Secretariat is directed 
to communicate the provisions of the resolution to the Food and 
Agriculture Organization, other intergovernmental organizations, and 
the Secretariat of the U.N. Convention on the Law of the Sea.
    The United States strongly supports the adoption of a resolution 
that provides a standard interpretation of introduction from the sea, 
as well as develops basic measures for implementation (see our Federal 
Register notice of February 17, 2000 [65 FR 8190] ). This draft 
resolution submitted by Australia lays a solid framework for the 
Parties to discuss and consider the issue. However, a number of 
technical issues remain unanswered in this document. These issues 
include, among others, prior granting of a certificate before landing, 
information required on an introduction-from-the-sea certificate, how 
to anticipate type and quantity of catch to make a non-detriment 
finding and issue a certificate in advance of specimen collection, 
clarification of procedures for transit, and the issuance of 
certificates for shipments that are split and/or transferred to vessels 
that did not harvest the specimens. The United

[[Page 12407]]

States intends to support this resolution as a way to define and frame 
the issue of introduction from the sea, while recognizing that 
developing a mechanism to address the remaining technical 
implementation issues is critical. The United States would support 
broadening operative paragraphs of the draft resolution to ensure these 
issues are adequately addressed.
19. Report on National Reports Required Under Article VIII, Paragraph 
7(a), of the Convention [Doc. 11.19]
    When we completed this notice, we still had not received a document 
on this agenda item from the Secretariat. The United States supports 
efforts to encourage all Parties to submit annual reports, for all 
species of fauna and flora, consistent with their domestic legislation. 
Each Party is required by CITES to submit an annual report containing a 
summary of the permits it has granted and the types and numbers of 
specimens of species in the CITES Appendices that it has imported and 
exported. Accurate annual report data are essential to measure the 
impact of international trade on CITES-listed species, and it can also 
be an effective enforcement tool, particularly when imports into a 
given country are compared to export quotas from other countries. The 
United States intends to meet our obligation to submit our annual 
report by the opening of COP11.
20. Enforcement
1. Review of alleged infractions and other problems of implementation 
of the Convention [Doc. 11.20.1]

    Article XIII of CITES provides for a review of alleged infractions 
by the Conference of the Parties. The Secretariat prepares an 
Infractions Report for each meeting of the COP, which details instances 
in which the Convention is not being effectively implemented, or where 
trade is adversely affecting a species. The United States proposes to 
support the Secretariat's biennial review of alleged infractions by the 
Parties and any necessary or appropriate recommendations to obtain 
wider compliance with the terms of the Convention. When we completed 
this notice, we still had not received a copy of the infractions report 
from the Secretariat, but the United States will closely review it when 
received, and provide comments to the Secretariat if necessary.

2. Implementation of Resolutions [Doc. 11.20.2]

    At COP10 Decision 10.120 was adopted which directed the Secretariat 
to prepare a list of Resolutions in effect so that Parties could assess 
their level of implementation and determine where they faced 
difficulties implementing them. The Secretariat prepared a list which 
was distributed with Notification to the Parties No. 987, and requested 
information on implementation of resolutions. The Secretariat received 
limited responses to their request and therefore cannot complete the 
directed analysis for the COP. The Secretariat is proposing in this 
document to continue the analysis of resolutions and their 
implementation difficulties, and present this analysis to the Standing 
Committee in 2001. We support the analysis by the Secretariat of 
resolution implementation and recognizing the difficulties encountered 
with specific resolutions, will support the proposed change in this 
document.
21. National Laws for Implementation of the Convention
1. National legislation project [Doc. 11.21.1]

    The Secretariat prepared this document which provides a report on 
the progress of the National Legislation Project, which was initiated 
pursuant to Resolution Conf. 8.4. This document also outlines a legal 
capacity-building strategy proposed by the Secretariat to assist the 
Parties in the development of national legislation for the 
implementation of CITES. This strategy, including the possibility to 
recommend suspensions of trade, was endorsed by the Standing Committee 
at its 42nd meeting. Building the capacity for Parties to create solid 
national laws with full implementation and enforcement provisions is 
critical. The U.S. supports efforts to assist Parties in the 
development of adequate measures to implement the Convention, while 
continuing efforts begun at COP8 (with strong U.S. support) to ensure 
that all Parties adequately implement Article VIII of the CITES treaty, 
regarding adoption of implementing legislation with adequate 
enforcement provisions. The U.S. prefers that priority be given to the 
Secretariat's efforts to complete its legislative review of the 
remaining Parties for which this has not been done, and conduct a 
review of the national legislation of any new Parties that accede to 
the Convention. Our hope is that the excellent work that has gone into 
this project will continue to provide encouragement to those Parties 
without adequate legislation to fulfill their obligations under Article 
VIII. In implementing the strategy the U.S. supports the Secretariat's 
intent to conduct activities within existing funding levels and as 
donor funds become available. We believe that priority should be given 
to those Parties identified as having inadequate measures to implement 
the Convention and which also have a high volume of trade. The U.S. 
believes that the Secretariat should also prioritize efforts to develop 
model provisions that can be incorporated into national laws.

2. Measures to be taken with regard to Parties without adequate 
legislation [Doc. 11.21.2]

    The Secretariat prepared this document which provides an update on 
the seven Parties that have been engaged in significant trade and whose 
legislation at COP10 failed to meet the requirements for implementing 
CITES. It also provides a draft decision on measures that could be 
taken in relation to four Parties engaged in high volumes of trade 
whose legislation was analyzed and determined to be inadequate. The 
proposed decision lays out the need for the affected Parties to adopt 
adequate legislation by October 2001. It also proposes that other 
Parties with inadequate legislation whose trade volume is not high 
adopt adequate legislation before COP12. We support the review of 
national laws and strongly believe that CITES' effectiveness is 
undermined when Parties do not have adequate national laws in place for 
implementing the Convention. We also fully support the recommendation 
of taking necessary measures when Parties continue to fail to adopt 
adequate legislation to implement CITES.
22. Reporting of Seizures [Doc. 11.22]
    Israel has proposed this resolution, which recommends that Parties 
provide, in a timely manner, detailed information on any interceptions 
or seizures to the country of origin/export and the enforcement unit of 
the Secretariat, as well as detailed information on arrests and 
prosecutions. The United States strongly supports the concept of 
communication with other Parties on seizures, arrests, and 
prosecutions. The United States routinely provides seizure information 
as part of its annual report to the CITES Secretariat and information 
to originating or exporting countries on a case-by-case basis. However, 
the United States does not believe that Parties have the resources to 
communicate details on each seizure, arrest, or prosecution. Instead, 
the United States would propose to encourage Parties to communicate 
details as soon as possible for all Appendix I species and major

[[Page 12408]]

commercial seizures of any CITES species, as well as any related 
arrests or prosecutions.
23. Persistent Offenders [Doc. 11.23]
    This resolution, submitted by Israel, recommends that the CITES 
Secretariat compile a master list of persistent offenders and circulate 
the list to each Party, and that national Management Authorities 
decline to honor any CITES permit listing one or more of these 
persistent offenders. While the United States recognizes that the 
issuance of CITES permits to persons or businesses that continually 
violate the Convention undermines both conservation and enforcement 
efforts, by our laws, the United States would be unable to provide such 
a list of persistent offenders, or prevent the importation of any 
shipments with authentic and valid permits. Alternatively, the U.S. 
would urge Parties to seek other national solutions to remedy this 
problem. In the U.S. an applicant may be denied U.S. permits if 
convicted, or if they have pleaded guilty, for a felony violation of 
several domestic laws, including the Lacey Act Amendments of 1981.
24. Use of Annotations in the Appendices [Doc. 11.24]
    Annotations are ``footnotes'' in the CITES Appendices that are 
being used by the CITES Parties for a number of purposes. In recent 
years, they are increasingly used when species or geographically 
distinct populations of species are transferred from Appendix I to II 
with an annotation; the annotation specifies that certain parts, 
products, or specimens are allowed to be traded under the provisions of 
Appendix II, while other parts and products are still treated as 
Appendix I species. Such downlistings can serve a conservation purpose, 
but the United States is quite concerned that no criteria or guidelines 
are in place for the Parties on how to use, adopt, or amend these 
annotations. At COP10, the Parties adopted Decision 10.70, which 
directed the Standing Committee to consider ``ways and means of 
clarifying legal and implementation issues related to the use of 
annotations in the appendices'' and present a report to COP11. To 
explore this issue and develop a draft resolution for submission to 
COP11, the Standing Committee established a working group in which the 
United States participated, along with Switzerland (Chair), Argentina, 
Canada, Germany, and Namibia. The Standing Committee endorsed the 
consensus report of that working group, and agreed to submit it to 
COP11. The United States notes that several proposals submitted by 
countries for consideration at COP11 involve such annotations, making 
such a clarifying resolution that much more necessary. The United 
States proposes to support the document submitted by the Standing 
Committee.
25. Procedure for the Review of Criteria for Amendment of Appendices I 
and II [Doc. 11.25]
    The criteria for amending the CITES Appendices were adopted at COP9 
in 1994, in Resolution Conf. 9.24, titled ``Criteria for Amendment of 
Appendices I and II.'' That resolution recommends the following: ``that 
the text and the annexes of this Resolution be fully reviewed before 
the twelfth meeting of the Conference of the Parties with regard to the 
scientific validity of the criteria, definitions, notes, and guidelines 
and their applicability to different groups of organisms.'' The 
Standing Committee, with input from the Animals and Plants Committees, 
and assistance of the Secretariat, has developed a proposed procedure 
for the Parties to use to fulfill this recommendation. When we 
completed this notice, we still had not received the final document. 
The United States supported the procedure developed in consultation 
with the Animals, Plants, and Standing Committees, and we expect that 
the United States will support this procedure. The United States looks 
forward to input from international organizations with management 
competence for certain organisms, such as marine fish and tropical 
trees, but the United States considers it of the highest importance 
that any revision of the CITES listing criteria remain a CITES-driven 
process.
26. Definition of the Term ``appropriate and acceptable destinations'' 
[Doc. 11.26]
    This draft resolution was submitted by Kenya and addresses concerns 
that have resulted from annotations applied to the downlisting of the 
southern white rhinoceros in South Africa and African elephant 
populations in Botswana, Namibia, and Zimbabwe to Appendix II. Under 
these annotations, international trade in live animals was allowed to 
``appropriate and acceptable destinations.'' However, the annotations 
included no guidelines on how to determine if a destination was 
``appropriate and acceptable'' and gave no indication of whether the 
exporting or importing country was responsible for making such a 
determination, or if the animals could be subsequently reexported. This 
draft resolution provides a definition of ``appropriate and acceptable 
destinations'' as those where the animals will be humanely treated, 
free to exhibit normal behavior, and able to contribute to the 
conservation of their species in the wild, with priority being given to 
other range states. Only export would be allowed, not reexport, and the 
Management Authority of the exporting country would be responsible for 
determining that the terms of the annotation had been met. The draft 
resolution also includes guidelines to assist the Management Authority 
of the exporting country in making that determination.
    The United States agrees that the wording of these annotations is 
unclear and believes an effort toward clarifying when a destination is 
``appropriate and acceptable'' is needed. While generally supportive, 
the United States is concerned about some aspects of the draft 
resolution and continues to evaluate it.
27. Recognition of Risks and Benefits of Trade in Wildlife [Doc. 11.27]
    This document is a draft resolution prepared by Kenya. The United 
States supports the idea that, when effectively managed, international 
trade in wildlife specimens may provide important benefits to local 
communities and may serve an important management need. The United 
States also agrees that achieving sustainable levels of trade can be 
difficult and that illegal trade may pose a serious threat to a 
species' survival. The United States agrees that these are important 
considerations but is undecided on whether to support this resolution 
as drafted.
28. Quotas for Species in Appendix I
1. Leopard [Doc. 11.28.1]

    This document, prepared by the Secretariat, reports on the use of 
export quotas for Panthera pardus (leopard), under the provisions of 
Resolution Conf. 10.14. The document discusses the requirement in the 
resolution that the Secretariat recommend to the Parties to suspend 
imports of leopard hunting trophies from any country with an export 
quota that has not met the reporting requirements of the resolution. 
The Secretariat believes that the reporting requirements of the 
resolution should be changed, however. The United States is still 
considering this issue.

2. Markhor [Doc. 11.28.2]
    When we completed this notice, we still had not received this 
document, which is to be prepared by the Secretariat, on the 
implementation of Resolution Conf. 10.15, ``Establishment of Quotas for 
Markhor Hunting

[[Page 12409]]

Trophies,'' which deals with trophy export quotas for Capra falconeri 
(markhor) from Pakistan. The resolution requires a report from the 
Secretariat on implementation of this resolution by Pakistan, including 
the submission of a report. The United States will evaluate the 
document when it is received and develop a negotiating position.
29. Trade in Bear Specimens [Doc. 11.29]
    This report was prepared by the Secretariat in response to Decision 
10.65 which required a report on progress made in controlling illegal 
trade in bear parts and derivatives (Resolution Conf. 10.8). Decision 
10.44 requested that Parties and non-Parties document and quantify 
domestic demand for bear parts and derivatives. The information in 
these reports, from CITES annual reports and other reports provided by 
law enforcement agencies, provided the basis for the Secretariat's 
report. Doc. 11.29 outlines findings on consumer demand, legislation, 
enforcement factors, education and reduction of demand, and 
conservation. The Secretariat believes that the guidance and 
recommendations of Resolution Conf. 10.8 remain valid and relevant. 
However, it does not believe that illegal trade in bear parts and 
derivatives will have been significantly reduced by COP11. The 
Secretariat suggests that range and consumer countries still need to 
follow the recommendations of the resolution and that the subject of 
conservation of and trade in bears should continue to be discussed by 
the Parties. The Secretariat recommends that a report be required for 
COP12 and that Decision 10.44 be repealed and a new decision be agreed 
upon at COP11.
    The United States proposes to support the Secretariat's report and 
recommendations in Doc. 11.29.
30. Conservation of and Trade in Tigers
1. Implementation of Resolution Conf. 9.13 (Rev.) [Doc. 11.30.1]
2. Implementation of Decision 10.66 [Doc. 11.30.2]
    When we completed this notice, we still had not received either of 
these documents from the Secretariat for these agenda items. When we 
receive these documents from the Secretariat, the United States will 
evaluate them and develop negotiating positions.
    In January 1999, we hosted the CITES Tiger Missions Technical Team 
in Los Angeles, California, as part of its investigations of tiger 
range and consumer states. This visit provided us as well as other 
relevant Federal agencies, an opportunity to meet with the members of 
the technical team and outline law enforcement and public outreach 
efforts with regard to tiger conservation in the United States. The 
team prepared a report of its mission, which was presented at the 42nd 
meeting of the Standing Committee. The United States looks forward to 
participating in the next step of developing an action plan for 
improving the control of trade in specimens of tiger and related 
activities.
    In October 1998, Congress passed the Rhinoceros and Tiger 
Conservation Act of 1998. This Act amended the 1994 Act of the same 
name by inserting the following: ``To prohibit the sale, importation, 
and exportation of products intended for human consumption or 
application containing, or labeled or advertised as containing, any 
substance derived from any species of rhinoceros or tiger.'' The Act 
also directs the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to develop and 
implement an educational outreach program in the United States for the 
conservation of rhinoceros and tiger species. We are currently 
developing a draft interim educational outreach plan and, in the near 
future, will present it to the public for comment in a Federal Register 
notice. In the notice announcing our draft plan, we will also be 
seeking partnerships in carrying out the activities of the final plan, 
once it is developed. The Service also continues to be active in 
providing funding for tiger conservation worldwide through the 
Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Fund.
31. Conservation of and Trade in Elephants
1. Experimental trade in raw ivory of populations in Appendix II [Doc. 
11.31.1]
    When we completed this notice, we still had not received the 
document for this agenda item from the Secretariat. When we receive the 
document from the Secretariat, the United States will evaluate it and 
develop a negotiating position.

2. Monitoring of illegal trade and illegal killing [Doc. 11.31.2]

    When we completed this notice, we still had not received the 
document for this agenda item from the Secretariat. When we receive the 
document from the Secretariat, the United States will evaluate it and 
develop a negotiating position.

3. Revision of Resolution Conf. 10.10 [Doc. 11.31.3]

    The document for consideration was submitted by Kenya and India. 
The document emphasizes a need to revise Resolution Conf. 10.10 due to 
apparent inconsistencies in the requirements of Resolution Conf 10.10 
as they related to Decision 10.1.
    The United States is undecided on whether it will support the 
proposed resolution from Kenya and India. The United States is 
continuing to evaluate this issue, and develop a policy position on 
this proposed resolution.

4. Non-commercial disposal of ivory stockpiles [Doc. 11.31.4]

    The document was submitted by Kenya. The document emphasizes the 
need to revise the process for the noncommercial disposal of ivory 
stockpiles that was established under the terms of Decision 10.2. We 
are undecided on whether the United States will support this proposed 
resolution, and we will continue to consider it and gather relevant 
information in order to develop a negotiating position.
32. Conservation of and Trade in Rhinoceroses [Doc. 11.32]
    The Secretariat prepared this document. The United States agrees 
with the decision taken at the 42nd meeting of the Standing Committee 
not to fund the work outlined in the report on the workshop to develop 
standardized indicators to measure the success of rhinoceros 
conservation measures in the context of CITES Resolution Conf. 9.14. 
The United States, however, strongly supports Resolution Conf. 9.14. 
Furthermore, the United States continues to support efforts in both 
range states and consumer states to control the illegal trade in 
rhinoceros horn.
    From 1996 through 1999, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, through 
the Rhinoceros and Tiger Conservation Fund, awarded 80 grants (totaling 
US$1,437,000) in 12 countries for rhino and tiger conservation. Through 
this fund, we will continue to support critical international 
conservation efforts in nations whose activities directly affect 
rhinoceros and tiger populations. With regard to the Secretariat's 
recommendation in Doc. 11.32, the United States does not feel that it 
would be appropriate to repeal Resolution Conf. 9.14. However, the 
United States believes that revising this resolution along the lines of 
the revisions made to Resolution Conf. 9.13, with regard to the 
conservation of and trade in tigers at COP10, would be appropriate.
33. Exports of Vicuna Wool and Cloth [Doc. 11.33]
    At COP6, certain populations of the vicuna (Vicugna vicugna) in 
Chile and Peru were transferred from Appendix I

[[Page 12410]]

to II. The remaining Peruvian populations were transferred to Appendix 
II at COP9, with an annotation allowing export only of cloth products, 
wool sheared from live animals, and the Peruvian stockpile of 3,249 
kilograms of wool remaining in November 1994. At COP10, certain vicuna 
populations of Argentina and Bolivia were also transferred from 
Appendix I to II with an annotation for specially marked products.
    When we completed this notice, we still had not received a document 
on this agenda item from the Secretariat. When we receive this document 
from the Secretariat, the United States will evaluate it and develop a 
negotiating position. At COP10, the United States supported the 
transfer of certain vicuna populations to Appendix.
34. Conservation of and Control of Trade in Tibetan Antelope [Doc. 
11.34]
    The People's Republic of China submitted this document as part of 
their ongoing efforts to promote international cooperation to conserve 
the Appendix I-listed Tibetan antelope (Pantholops hodgsonii). Wild 
populations of Tibetan antelope on the Tibetan Plateau have been 
subjected to heavy poaching for their wool, called shahtoosh, which is 
smuggled to India, woven into high-fashion shawls in the State of Jammu 
and Kashmir, and illegally exported around the world. An International 
Workshop on the Conservation and Control of Trade in Tibetan Antelope 
was held in Xining, China, in October 1999. Participants of the 
International Workshop, including two representatives of the Fish and 
Wildlife Service, adopted a consensus declaration, the ``Xining 
Declaration,'' which, among other things, calls for COP11 to adopt a 
resolution urging all Parties to strengthen law enforcement to control 
trade in parts and derivatives of Tibetan antelope, especially 
shahtoosh. An early draft of this resolution was presented to 
participants of the International Workshop for comment. The draft more 
or less reflects the content of the ``Xining Declaration'' and, if 
adopted and implemented, would contribute positively to conservation of 
wild populations of the Tibetan antelope. The United States intends to 
support an appropriately edited version of this Resolution at COP11.
35. Trade in Freshwater Turtles and Tortoises to and in Southeast Asia 
[Doc. 11.35]
    This document is a discussion paper that was cosponsored by Germany 
and the United States, and our reason for submitting it is discussed in 
the Federal Register notice of February 17, 2000 [65 FR 8190]. The 
United States will work for adoption of the document and its 
recommendations by the Parties.
36. Trade in Seahorses and Other Members of the Family Syngnathidae 
[Doc. 11.36]
    This document is a discussion paper and was cosponsored by 
Australia and the United States. Our proposed negotiating position is 
discussed in the Federal Register notice of February 17, 2000 [65 FR 
8190]. The United States will work for adoption of the document and its 
recommendations by the Parties.
37. Identification and Reporting Requirements for Trade in Specimens of 
Hard Coral [Doc. 11.37]
    When we completed this notice, we still had not received a document 
on this agenda item from the Secretariat. At COP10 the United States 
submitted a resolution on coral identification and reporting at the 
request of the Animals Committee. The proposed resolution was not 
adopted by the Parties. The issue remained a concern of the Animals 
Committee and a working group, which included the United States, was 
formed to develop solutions to the problem of recording coral sand, 
gravel, and live rock in international trade, as well as the 
identification of these commodities. The United States strongly 
supports efforts to simplify the coral identification and reporting 
process, however, the United States is concerned that some of the 
proposed solutions in this resolution merely eliminate CITES controls 
on certain commodities. The United States is firmly engaged in the 
issue of coral reef conservation, including the role of trade, and 
proposes to support only those efforts that do not weaken CITES 
controls for coral.
38. Timber Species
1. Report from the Secretariat [Doc. 11.38.1]

    When we completed this notice, we still had not received a document 
on this agenda item from the Secretariat. At COP10 the Parties adopted 
several Decisions on timber species. Decision 10.130 requires the 
Secretariat to investigate the reasons for non-reporting by Parties on 
CITES timber trade, particularly by importing countries, to investigate 
the extent to which Parties have informed the timber traders in their 
countries of CITES procedures, and to report back on these issues at 
COP11. The United States supports this process. The United States 
reports U.S. trade in CITES timber species in our CITES annual reports, 
and we have worked with the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) over 
the last several years to inform timber traders and producers in the 
United States and abroad of CITES procedures and requirements. For 
example, at the 9th meeting of the Plants Committee in June 1999, the 
USDA's Forest Service presented a draft brochure that it prepared with 
the help of the Service, the U.S. Department of State, and the 
International Wood Products Association, aimed at providing timber 
traders and producers worldwide with a better understanding of CITES.
    Under Decision 10.134, the Secretariat will also report at COP11 on 
the implementation of the special procedures regarding time validity 
and change of destination for permits issued for timber species and 
provide recommendations on whether or not these special procedures 
should be maintained. We have reviewed our annual report records on 
U.S. timber species trade since COP10, and we have determined that no 
CITES documents with a change in destination or a change in the time 
validity were presented for clearance at U.S. ports of import during 
this time period. If the Secretariat's report shows that the other 
Parties also have not cleared any CITES timber documents showing a 
change in destination or a change in the time validity, then the United 
States would support not maintaining these special procedures for 
timber species.

2. Progress in the conservation of Swietenia macrophylla (bigleaf 
mahogany) [Doc. 11.38.2]

    Brazil has proposed including bigleaf mahogany as an agenda item 
for discussion. This inclusion will provide the Parties an opportunity 
to discuss progress in the conservation of Swietenia macrophylla since 
COP10. At COP10, during discussions in Plenary, Brazil offered to host 
a Mahogany Working Group meeting that would examine the conservation 
status of the species, including related forest policies and management 
and international cooperation and trade, and make recommendations 
accordingly. Brazil submitted Doc. 11.38.2, a summary report of the 
meeting of the Mahogany Working Group, hosted in Brasilia, Brazil, in 
June 1998. We will work closely with other Federal agencies and intend 
to develop for submission an informational document outlining the 
United States' views on the issue, actions under way to conserve the 
species, and some useful recommendations. The United States appreciates 
Brazil's efforts and looks forward to increased efforts to foster the

[[Page 12411]]

conservation of this species, both generally and in the CITES context 
specifically.
39. Standard Nomenclature [Doc. 11.39]
    This document was prepared by the Secretariat based on the reports 
of the co-Chairs of the Nomenclature Committee (Documents 11.11.4.1 and 
11.11.4.2). The document is a draft resolution on standard 
nomenclature. The draft resolution adopts additional standard 
references for crocodiles, turtles, tortoises, tuataras, snakes, 
chameleons, lizards in the family Cordylidae, Tupinambis species, fish, 
and plants in the genera Aloe and Pachypodium. We have not fully 
evaluated all of these taxonomic references. However, the United States 
tentatively proposes to support their adoption, pending input during 
this public comment process. We invite the review of these references 
by experts in these taxa.
40. Assistance to Scientific Authorities for Making Non-detriment 
Findings [Doc. 11.40]
    The CITES treaty requires scientific non-detriment findings for all 
exports and introductions from the sea for CITES-listed species, and 
for all imports of Appendix I species. It is vital for species 
conservation that scientifically based non-detriment findings are 
provided prior to issuance of permits, and that these findings are 
based on biologically sound information. The Parties have recognized, 
and the United States agrees, that the conservation of species subject 
to international trade would benefit greatly from increased attention 
to the issuance of non-detriment findings. Towards that end, we worked 
closely with the IUCN--the World Conservation Union, which convened two 
international workshops to ``Develop Guidance on the Making of Non-
Detriment Findings,'' held in Hong Kong in October 1998 and the United 
Kingdom in October 1999. The United States provided funding for the 
workshops through the U.S. Department of State annual funding to IUCN. 
Our Office of Scientific Authority was an invited participant at both 
workshops, as a representative on the Animals Committee, as were 
several representatives from the Animals and Plants Committees and 
Scientific Authorities from several countries. This was the first-ever 
opportunity to develop an international consensus on the CITES 
scientific decision-making process. The workshops were very productive 
and produced several useful documents, including a report, checklist 
for the Parties, and material to be used in training. When we completed 
this notice, we still had not officially received the document on this 
agenda item, but we have seen and commented on the drafts, and we 
anticipate that the United States will fully support it.
41. Significant Trade in Appendix-II Species
1. Implementation of Resolution Conf. 8.9 [Doc. 11.41.1]
    This issue pertains to the implementation of Resolution Conf. 8.9, 
``The Trade in Wild-caught Animal Specimens.'' This ongoing process is 
carried out by the Animals Committee, whereby trade in selected 
Appendix II, wild-caught animal species subject to high levels of 
international trade is reviewed for sustainability. Based on analyses 
of biology and trade, the Animals Committee consults with range 
countries and makes recommendations such as trade quotas, request for 
non-detriment findings, or field studies. Affected Parties must report 
their progress in satisfying the recommendations to the Secretariat. 
Unsatisfactory compliance may result in a recommendation from the 
Secretariat to the Standing Committee for implementing strict measures 
such as trade suspensions. The essence of this resolution and this 
process is implementation of CITES Article IV, specifically dealing 
with the required non-detriment findings. This process has been an 
extremely successful, resulting in benefits for species conservation. 
When we completed this notice, we still had not received this document, 
which we surmise will be a report of the Secretariat on implementation 
of this resolution since COP10.

2. Revision of Resolution Conf. 8.9 [Doc. 11.41.2]

    The Animals and Plants Committees have cooperated closely since 
COP10 to develop proposed amendments to Resolution Conf. 8.9 that will 
both include plants in the process and improve implementation. The 
Plants Committee submitted several proposed amendments for 
consideration by the Animals Committee, which provided its views and 
input to the Plants Committee and the Secretariat. This document was 
prepared by the Secretariat on behalf of the Animals and Plants 
Committees and contains draft revisions to Conf. 8.9. We provided 
detailed comments and suggestions on these proposed revisions of this 
vital resolution. The document also contains a proposed Decision that 
will direct the work of the Animals and Plants Committee in 
implementing this resolution. We have not yet fully reviewed the 
document, but the proposed U.S. position is to support it, possibly 
with some minor technical amendments.
42. Trade in Specimens of Species Transferred to Appendix II Subject to 
Annual Export Quotas [Doc. 11.42]
    This document refers to populations of species transferred to 
Appendix II with a quota on exports, as a precautionary action. Parties 
are required to report on their exports under these COP-approved 
quotas, and this document provides the Secretariat an opportunity to 
comment on which Parties have and have not submitted the required 
reports. When we completed this notice, we still had not received this 
document. The United States will develop its position after the 
document has been received and reviewed.
43. Amendment of Resolution Conf. 5.10 on the Definition of ``primarily 
commercial purposes'' [Doc. 11.43]
    This draft resolution, submitted by the Republic of South Africa, 
would amend parts of Resolution Conf. 5.10 and change the 
interpretation by Parties of the term ``primarily commercial 
purposes.'' Article III of the Convention requires that a Management 
Authority of the importing country issue an import permit or 
certificate of introduction from the sea for specimens of Appendix-I 
species only if satisfied that the specimens are not to be used for 
primarily commercial purposes. In 1985, the Parties, recognizing that 
interpretation of this term varied significantly among Parties, adopted 
Resolution Conf. 5.10 to help Parties evaluate whether an import could 
be considered ``primarily commercial.'' It defined the term 
``commercial'' and provided general principles and examples to guide 
the Parties in assessing the commerciality of intended use of specimens 
to be imported.
    The proposed resolution changes the definition of the term 
``primarily commercial purposes.'' The proposed resolution requires a 
consideration of the benefits of a transaction to the exporting country 
when evaluating the commercial nature of an import permit for Appendix 
I specimens. It allows Parties to consider an import ``not for 
primarily commercial purposes'' even if it is commercial, if there is a 
conservation benefit in the exporting country. Parties would be asked 
to consider the translocation of wild specimens of Appendix-I species 
to private lands, such as game farms and ranches, as not primarily 
commercial if

[[Page 12412]]

the interest for conservation is demonstrated and predominant.
    While the United States is sympathetic to the need to provide 
resources for conservation of species in the wild, this proposed 
resolution is not consistent with CITES, and the United States proposes 
to oppose it. This resolution would create loopholes for commercial 
trade in specimens of Appendix-I species, which violates the treaty and 
could lead to significant harm to populations in the wild. Article II, 
paragraph 1 of CITES states, in regard to Appendix-I species, ``Trade 
in specimens of these species must be subject to particularly strict 
regulation in order not to endanger further their survival and must 
only be authorized in exceptional circumstances.'' This resolution is 
not consistent with that article of the treaty. As drafted, the 
resolution also does not comply with Article III of the treaty, which 
requires that the importing Management Authority be satisfied that the 
purpose of the import is not for primarily commercial purposes. Whether 
a conservation benefit exists for the species is part of the ``non-
detriment'' finding made by the Scientific Authorities of the exporting 
and importing countries, not part of the determination as to whether a 
transaction is for primarily commercial purposes.
44. Bushmeat as a Trade and Wildlife Management Issue [Doc. 11.44]
    This document is a discussion paper submitted by the United 
Kingdom. The United States recognizes that the illegal international 
commercial trade in African bushmeat poses a serious threat to the 
survival of numerous protected species, including elephants and the 
great apes. Further, commercial-level bushmeat hunting threatens both 
CITES and non-CITES species. Because much of the illegal commercial 
trade involves CITES-listed species and occurs between CITES member 
countries, CITES is an appropriate forum for discussing this issue. 
However, the United States believes that it is important to limit this 
discussion to the aspects of the larger bushmeat issue that can be 
addressed within the scope of CITES. Therefore, the United States 
supports the idea of a discussion on the issue of commercial African 
bushmeat trade but believes that the United Kingdom's document is too 
broad. We appreciate that the United Kingdom is calling attention to 
this issue, and we anticipate being actively involved in discussions on 
the topic at COP11.
45. Amendment of Resolution Conf. 9.6
1. Concerning diagnostic samples, samples for identification, research 
and taxonomic purposes and cell cultures and serum for biomedical 
research [Doc. 11.45.1]

    This proposed amendment to Resolution Conf. 9.6 on trade in readily 
recognizable parts and derivatives was submitted by Switzerland, 
Germany, and the United Kingdom. If this resolution is adopted, the 
Parties would agree that certain tissues are not readily recognizable. 
These tissues include extracted and purified DNA; samples of blood, 
hair, feather, and other tissues (fresh or preserved, not including 
live gametes and embryos) sent to laboratories for diagnostic, 
identification, research, and taxonomic purposes, with the aim of 
species' conservation, in quantities required to properly perform DNA 
analyses, sexing of individual specimens, and in vivo or post mortem 
veterinary diagnoses; and cell cultures and serum for biomedical 
research and the production of immunological products. This designation 
would allow such samples to be shipped across international boundaries 
without any CITES documents.
    The United States recognizes that the timely movement of scientific 
research specimens can benefit the conservation of protected species 
and acknowledges that CITES permitting requirements should be 
simplified for these type of samples. However, the United States plans 
to oppose this amendment of Resolution Conf. 9.6, but work toward other 
approaches that could be considered (see next paragraph). The United 
States is concerned that this proposed resolution uses the purpose of 
the trade as the basis for whether specimens are considered readily 
recognizable, rather than limiting such a determination to 
characteristics of the specimens themselves. To treat such samples as 
not readily recognizable parts and derivatives could set a precedent 
that could potentially undermine the effectiveness of the Convention 
and species' conservation. The resolution does not address whether 
samples from wild specimens have been collected legally and in 
conjunction with the conservation agencies in the country of origin, or 
whether they were collected by persons with appropriate expertise to 
ensure that collection methods do not pose an unnecessary risk to 
animals, especially Appendix-I species. It apparently would allow the 
import of such Appendix I specimens for commercial purposes. Resolution 
Conf. 5.10, recommends that trade in biomedical specimens be subject to 
close scrutiny and presumed to be commercial. If adopted, the proposed 
resolution could eliminate controls on this commercial trade in 
Appendix-I species for all specimens except live animals. In addition, 
the resolution raises implementation issues. It does not define ``other 
tissues'' and does not address how a country would determine that 
samples meet the circumstances outlined in the resolution, that is, 
ensure that the samples to be traded are exempted tissues, are being 
used for one of the specified purposes, and are in quantities 
appropriate for the type of analysis.
    The United States is evaluating a number of provisions the Parties 
could consider to assist in streamlining the movement of biological 
tissue samples. First, the Parties could agree to exempt from CITES 
requirements synthetically derived DNA that contains no part of the 
original template. This action would differentiate between DNA 
extracted directly from blood or tissue samples and synthetically 
derived DNA, but would not open the discussion to other parts and 
products that could be exempted from CITES requirements. Second, the 
Parties could consider whether to amend Resolution Conf. 2.14 on the 
noncommercial loan, donation, or exchange of museum and herbarium 
specimens to include preserved samples to be used for diagnostic, 
identification, research, or taxonomic purposes when between registered 
institutions. The Parties would need to consider a number of practical 
implementation issues, such as whether samples could be completely 
destroyed during analysis or whether a portion of each sample would 
need to be maintained for future scientific reference. The Parties 
could also consider treating serial cultured cell lines as a form of 
asexual propagation that could qualify for the exemptions of Article 
VII, paragraphs 4 and 5, even for biomedical purposes. Whether other 
types of specimens could also qualify as artificially propagated or 
bred in captivity could also be investigated. The United States 
welcomes suggestions on other approaches that could be considered for 
the movement of tissue samples.

2. Concerning final cosmetic products containing caviar [Doc. 11.45.2]

    This resolution, submitted by Germany and Switzerland, recommends 
that Resolution Conf. 9.6 (Trade in Readily Recognizable Parts and 
Derivatives) be amended to eliminate CITES controls for cosmetic 
products containing caviar. The United States opposes this proposed 
amendment to

[[Page 12413]]

Resolution Conf. 9.6 and is concerned about this attempt to eliminate 
controls on commodities that may contain only small quantities of 
wildlife by considering that they are not readily recognizable. The 
precedent that could be set by adoption of this amendment could extend 
beyond the legal movement of Appendix II sturgeon caviar. There is no 
apparent difference in the recognition of this type of commodity than 
for any other cosmetic product or other processed products including 
medicinal or food items that contain small quantities of CITES-listed 
wildlife or plants. The United States proposes that Parties work on 
streamlining the permitting and control process regulating the 
international trade in these products rather than eliminate CITES 
controls.
46. Cross-border Movements of Live Animals for Exhibition [Doc. 11.46]
    When we completed this notice, we still had not received a document 
on this agenda item from the Secretariat. As outlined in our Federal 
Register notice of February 17, 2000 (65 FR 8190), the United States 
has a strong interest in making the current resolution on transborder 
movements of live-animal exhibitions (Resolution Conf. 8.16) work 
better. When we receive the relevant document from the Secretariat, the 
United States will review it and develop a negotiating position.
47. Revision of Resolutions on Ranching and Trade in Ranched Specimens 
[Doc. 11.47]
    At its 15th meeting (July 1999), the Animals Committee agreed upon 
a draft resolution that would amend Resolution Conf. 10.18 on ranching 
and trade in ranched specimens, by incorporating the remaining elements 
of Resolution Conf. 5.16 (Rev.), on the marking of ranched specimens in 
trade. This text will be submitted to the meeting of the COP by the 
Secretariat, on behalf of the Animals Committee. Participants at that 
meeting raised concerns about the many different management techniques 
used in ranching and their implications for non-detriment findings, the 
need for increased monitoring of specimens released into the wild, and 
interpretation of the terms ``uniform marking system'' and ``year of 
production.''
    When we completed this notice, we still had not received a document 
for this agenda item from the Secretariat. When we receive the document 
from the Secretariat, the United States will evaluate it and develop a 
negotiating position.
48. Registration of Operations Breeding Specimens of Appendix I Species 
in Captivity for Commercial Purposes [Doc. 11.48]
    At COP10 the Parties discussed the issue of registration of 
facilities breeding Appendix I species in captivity for commercial 
purposes and if a need exists to amend or revise Resolution Conf. 8.15. 
This issue pertains to implementation of Article VII of the treaty. At 
COP10 the Parties adopted Decision 10.77, which instructed the Animals 
Committee to ``examine the effectiveness of and the need for the 
existing registration system for operations breeding specimens of 
Appendix I species in captivity for commercial purposes.'' The same 
Decision also called upon the Animals Committee to consider the 
proposed definition of ``bred in captivity for commercial purposes.'' 
In addition, Resolution Conf. 10.16 asked the Animals Committee to 
develop a list of species that are commonly bred in captivity to the 
second or following generations. These issues have been very 
controversial, as a great deal of misunderstanding has occurred. They 
were all discussed at great length at the 14th and 15th meetings of the 
CITES Animals Committee. The U.S. Government, through our offices, has 
worked actively on these issues since COP10.
    In terms of the registration of facilities (Resolution Conf. 8.15), 
the United States' views and comments on this issue have focused on 
practical solutions to problems related to the registration of 
commercial breeding operations, including streamlining the process when 
feasible, allowing for and encouraging range state consultation, and 
defining breeding for commercial purposes, while at the same time 
supporting range countries and their concerns, particularly regarding 
the legality of origin of the founder stock of captive animals. Some 
countries support repealing the registration requirement altogether. 
After consultations with Mexico and Canada, we note that all countries 
in North America support retention of some registration procedure, 
particularly to provide opportunities for range state input.
    In terms of the ``commonly bred'' list of species, a great deal of 
misunderstanding has developed concerning the meaning of paragraph 
(b)(ii)(C)(2)(a) of Resolution Conf. 10.16. This refers to species 
commonly bred in captivity throughout the world, and we are asked to 
determine which species, on a global basis, meet the bred-in-captivity 
criteria of Resolution Conf. 10.16 and qualify for the exemption of 
Article VII, paragraph 5. A working group of the Animals Committee was 
established on this issue, chaired by Chile, and the United States has 
been an active participant in the working group. We have not yet seen 
the final document on this issue. The United States proposes to support 
not developing a list of species commonly bred in captivity. Based on 
the United States' collective experience at the last two meetings of 
the Animals Committee, agreement on a list, and even the meaning of the 
list, is probably not possible. Continued efforts to produce a list 
will probably not advance the cause of global conservation. That is, 
the United States agrees with the idea of deleting paragraph 
(b)(ii)(C)(2)(a) of Resolution Conf. 10.16 in its entirety, but only as 
long as paragraph (b)(ii)(C)(2)(b) is retained, and the rest of the 
text in Resolution Conf. 10.16 remains virtually the same.
    The Chair of the Animals Committee will submit a document outlining 
all of the discussions on this complex issue. Although the United 
States commented on earlier drafts, when we completed this notice, we 
still had not received the final document.
49. Animal Hybrids: Amendment of Resolution Conf. 10.17 [Doc. 11.49]
    When we completed this notice, we still had not received this 
document, which we assume is a document that will be prepared by the 
Secretariat. We assume as well that this document will deal with 
aspects of Resolution Conf. 10.17, ``Animal Hybrids,'' that refer to 
the ``recent lineage'' of hybrid animals. The resolution uses the term 
``recent lineage,'' but does not define the term. The Animals Committee 
evaluated the issue, and recommended that the term ``recent lineage'' 
of a hybrid animal should be understood to mean the previous four 
generations of its lineage. The Secretariat has made this 
recommendation to the Parties in Notification No. 1998/28, dated 30 
June 1998. We assume that this document will recommend amending Conf. 
10.17 to clarify this point since such a determination is up to the 
Conference of the Parties, ultimately, and not the Animals Committee or 
the Secretariat. If that is the case, the United States proposes to 
support the recommendation.
50. Use of Microchips for Marking Live Animals in Trade [Doc. 11.50]
    At the 15th meeting of the Animals Committee (Madagascar, July 
1999), a document was presented by the Chair of

[[Page 12414]]

the working group (Czech Republic) considering this issue under 
Resolution Conf. 8.13 (``Use of Coded-microchip Implants for Marking 
Live Animals in Trade''). At the Animals Committee meeting, however, 
participants determined that the document contained recommendations 
that were ``not realistic.'' Therefore, the Animals Committee decided 
the issue should be referred to a smaller working group with the same 
Chair. This document (Doc. 11.50) was prepared by the Secretariat on 
behalf of the Animals Committee. It contains draft amendments to 
Resolution Conf. 8.13, based on discussions at the 15th meeting of the 
Animals Committee and recommended amendments endorsed by the Committee. 
The document also contains additional proposed amendments recommended 
by the Czech Republic, as Chair of the working group, based on 
discussions within the working group. The United States proposes to 
support the recommended amendments to Resolution Conf. 8.13 from the 
Animals Committee. The United States is still evaluating the subsequent 
proposed amendments from the Czech Republic.
51. Universal Tagging System for the Identification of Crocodilian 
Skins [Doc. 11.51]
    When we completed this notice, we still had not received this 
document from the Secretariat, although at the 15th meeting of the 
Animals Committee, the United States participated in drafting the 
proposed changes to Resolution Conf. 9.22, which this document proposes 
to amend. We expect the changes discussed in Doc. 11.51 to include the 
clarification of export procedures for specimens subject to quotas and 
standards to ensure that skins subject to quotas are tagged before 
export permits are issued (ensuring that unused tags are destroyed or 
not reissued) and deleting a section referring to unused stocks of tags 
that do not conform with the resolution. The proposed Animals Committee 
amendments are small adjustments to a resolution that has been very 
helpful in monitoring trade in crocodilian skins. If the final document 
reflects the changes agreed to at the Animals Committee, the United 
States proposes to support the changes.
52. Movement of Sample Crocodilian Skins [Doc. 11.52]
    This document is a draft decision submitted by the United States. 
Our proposed negotiating position is discussed in the Federal Register 
notice of February 17, 2000 (65 FR 8190). The United States will work 
for adoption of this document by the Parties.
53. Universal Labeling System for the Identification of Sturgeon 
Specimens (caviar)--[Doc. 11.53]
    Resolution Conf. 10.12 (``Conservation of Sturgeons'') directs the 
Secretariat, in consultation with the Animals Committee, to explore the 
development of a uniform marking system for sturgeon parts and 
derivatives to assist in identification of the species. The resolution 
recommends that this marking system be developed in consultation with 
appropriate experts in fisheries and industry and in collaboration with 
range States.
    A working group created at the 14th Meeting of the Animals 
Committee drafted recommendations for the creation of a universal 
marking system for sturgeon. This document was then discussed at the 
15th Meeting of the Animals Committee. The members of this working 
group, which included the United States, discussed at length the draft 
document on sturgeon marking and submitted a report on their 
conclusions. The group concluded that, initially, developing a marking 
system for caviar only would be most feasible. The group further 
recognized that a marking system should be recommended for the export 
of caviar from producing countries (primarily exporting countries) to 
the initial importing country. It was further agreed that the marking 
system should be as compatible as possible with those marking systems 
already in place in some caviar-producing countries.
    When we completed this notice, we still had not received the 
document for this agenda item from the Secretariat. When we receive the 
document from the Secretariat, the United States will evaluate it and 
develop a negotiating position. The United States supports efforts to 
more effectively monitor the international movement of caviar of 
Caspian Sea sturgeon species. If the marking system outlined in this 
document can be easily implemented, and is also adequate to provide the 
necessary information, the United States is prepared to support it.
54. Transport of Live Animals [Doc. 11.54]
    Resolution Conf. 10.21 (``Transport of Live Animals'') requests 
that Parties record and report to the Secretariat mortality data for 
CITES-listed species in trade and instructs the Secretariat to report 
on Parties that do not submit information. Very few Parties have 
complied. In Notification to the Parties No. 1999/43, the Secretariat 
requested that the Parties incorporate into their domestic legislation 
the IATA (International Air Transport Association) Live Animals 
Regulations (LAR), and that they report on their progress in doing so; 
ten Parties reported to the Secretariat in response to this 
Notification. We have incorporated the IATA LAR for mammals and birds 
into our humane transport regulations, and we are in the process of 
incorporating the IATA LAR for reptiles and amphibians into our humane 
transport regulations. At its January 1999 meeting, the Transport 
Working Group of the Animals Committee developed a simplified 
mortality/injury reporting form and asked the Parties to report data on 
selected species. Again, very few Parties have reported.
    When we completed this notice, we still had not received the 
document for this agenda item from the Secretariat. When we receive the 
document from the Secretariat, the United States will evaluate it and 
develop a negotiating position. Although this document is not yet 
available, we expect it to focus on data reporting problems and 
improved monitoring of live animal transport. The United States is 
monitoring, at its ports of entry, the trade in these 10 species as 
recommended on this form and will report this data.
55. Definition of the Term ``prepared'' [Doc. 11.55]
    This document is a draft resolution submitted by Kenya. The 
resolution emphasizes that the term ``prepared,'' as used in Articles 
III, IV, and V of CITES, regarding the shipping of live CITES 
specimens, has not been defined by the Parties but is generally 
considered to mean the act of packing live animals for shipment and 
export. The resolution proposes to define the term ``prepared'' to 
include all processes from the time of capture of live specimens to the 
point of export. The United States proposes to support this resolution 
from Kenya.
    This proposed definition is consistent with conditions that the 
United States uses on permits issued under stricter domestic 
legislation, such as the Endangered Species Act and the Wild Bird 
Conservation Act (WBCA). Many permits issued under the WBCA include the 
following condition: ``Furthermore, you should provide a description of 
collection methods, including measures taken to prevent incidental take 
(i.e, removal of more specimens from the wild than are actually 
requested for import).''

[[Page 12415]]

56. Trade in Traditional Medicines [Doc. 11.56]
    Decision 10.82 directs the Animals Committee to review the trade in 
animal species for use in traditional medicines, in order to assess its 
implications for wild populations. At the 15th meeting of the Animals 
Committee, it became clear that the Committee could not carry out 
Decision 10.82 without basic information on the many ingredients and 
uses of CITES-listed species parts or derivatives in traditional 
medicines, worldwide. The use of many CITES-listed species in 
traditional medicines remains undocumented, and information is sketchy 
or not available for entire geographic regions, such as Africa. For 
similar reasons, at its 42nd meeting, the Standing Committee moved to 
redraft Decision 10.143, which directs the Secretariat to review the 
roles of national legislation, law enforcement, forensics 
identification, and captive breeding, in regulating the trade in 
traditional medicines that contain parts or derivatives of CITES-listed 
species, and to report its findings at COP11.
    When we completed this notice, we still had not received the 
document for this agenda item from the Secretariat. When we receive the 
document, the United States will evaluate it and develop a negotiating 
position.
57. The Information Management Strategy [Doc. 11.57]
    When we completed this notice, we still had not received a document 
on this agenda item from the Secretariat. In order to effectively 
implement the Convention, CITES authorities must manage, interpret, and 
use relevant trade, law enforcement, and biological information. The 
CITES community generates large volumes of useful data, but the data 
does not always reach those who need it. At its 37th meeting, the 
Standing Committee proposed an Information Management Strategy to 
coordinate the delivery of such data, and to help improve the 
information management capacity of Parties that require assistance. At 
COP10, the World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC) submitted a 
document at the request of the Secretariat that included an Information 
Management Strategy. The Parties adopted this document, which directed 
the Secretariat (under Phase 1 of the Strategy) to develop 
electronically accessible information and to commission a pilot study 
in one CITES region (Africa was selected) to identify requirements for 
improving electronic communications among the Parties and the 
Secretariat. The United States supported the Information Management 
Strategy adopted at COP10 and continues to support progress toward 
developing and improving the electronic accessibility of information 
worldwide.
    The United States assumes that document Doc. 11.57 will include the 
Secretariat's report on the Phase 1 pilot study, as well as some 
projected costs for funding Phase 2. Phase 2 of the Strategy directs 
the Secretariat to establish a program of workshops to cover all CITES 
regions, develop a system to fulfill the needs of Parties identified in 
Phase 1, and maintain up-to-date standardized products to support the 
Parties' implementation of CITES. The United States will support the 
continuance of the Information Management Strategy at COP11.
58. Potential Risk of Wildlife Trade to the Tourism Industry [Doc. 
11.58]
    This document is a draft resolution submitted by Kenya. The 
document discusses the potentially detrimental effects of wildlife 
poaching, and subsequent enforcement actions, on the ecotourism 
industry. It also cautions that poorly planned wildlife tourism can be 
harmful to both local economies and the ecosystem. This resolution 
urges the Parties to recognize the potential economic benefits of 
appropriately planned wildlife tourism, and it further recommends that 
the Parties work to minimize the social, cultural and ecological 
impacts when developing wildlife tourism programs. The United States 
agrees that these are important considerations but at this time is 
undecided on whether to support this resolution as drafted.

Consideration of proposals for amendment of Appendices I and II

59. Proposals to Amend Appendices I and II [Doc. 11.59]
    In this section, we present the proposed U.S. negotiating positions 
on species amendment proposals submitted by other countries. Sixty-two 
species amendment proposals have been submitted for consideration at 
COP11, including 15 submitted or cosponsored by the United States. A 
complete list of all proposals, including those submitted or 
cosponsored by the United States, follows. They are listed in order of 
the proposal number (``Prop.'') assigned to them by the CITES 
Secretariat; the proposals will be considered in this order at the 
meeting of the COP, with the exception that all plant proposals will be 
discussed first. Only a brief discussion and reason are provided for 
proposals the United States supports. A more in-depth discussion and 
reasons are provided for proposals the United States opposes. Proposals 
for which the United States is undecided are so indicated, as is the 
basis for our indecision. Proposals submitted or cosponsored by the 
United States are listed but are not discussed here. Please refer to 
our Federal Register notice February 17, 2000 (65 FR 8190) for a 
discussion of these proposals and our reasons for submitting or co-
sponsoring them.

1. Proposals resulting from the periodic review by the Plants Committee 
[Doc. 11.59.1]

    We note that Proposals 11.1 through 11.11 were discussed at the 
ninth meeting of the Plants Committee in Darwin, Australia (June 7-11, 
1999). The Plants Committee, under Resolution Conf. 9.1, Annex 3, 
regularly reviews plant species included in the CITES Appendices. We 
reviewed the status of several native U.S. species at the request of 
the Plants Committee. Many of these species are not in recorded 
international trade in wild specimens, and the Plants Committee 
considered and decided to recommend their deletion from the Appendices 
or transfer from Appendix I to II. This recommendation is based on the 
view that species not in international trade in wild specimens should 
not be included in the Appendices, and that the conservation of species 
native to one country should be addressed through domestic management 
and trade control measures. The United States has submitted one such 
proposal (see Prop. 11.57, below). However, some of these species are 
listed on the U.S. Endangered Species Act, or are protected under State 
laws in the United States. In several cases, demand for wild specimens 
exists, and their inclusion and retention in the CITES Appendices is 
important, especially since CITES listing strengthens enforcement of 
trade restrictions by bringing the import controls of other countries 
to bear.
    The United States believes that if a CITES-listed species, whether 
in Appendix I or II, is not in international trade, the species should 
not necessarily be removed from the Appendices, if trade demand exists. 
Indeed, the lack of trade could mean that a Scientific Authority of the 
range country could not make the required non-detriment finding, and 
the Management Authority, therefore, could not issue permits. In such 
cases, the lack of trade means that CITES is being effectively 
implemented. For many of these species, the United States objects to 
their deletion or downlisting, and so informed the

[[Page 12416]]

Secretariat and Chair of the Plants Committee. Switzerland has 
submitted the proposal at request of the Plants Committee. You may 
obtain more information about some of these species and the United 
States' reviews for the Plants Committee on our web site (http://
international.fws.gov/global/plantpro.html). The United States supports 
the activities and actions of the Plants Committee, but also believes 
that the wishes of range countries should receive the highest 
consideration in decisions on these proposals.
    Prop. 11.1. Deletion of Ceropegia spp. from Appendix II. Submitted 
by Switzerland. Proposed U.S. position: Support, with possible 
exception of C. armandii.
    This genus consists of about 200 species, which are widely 
distributed in tropical and subtropical areas from western Africa to 
eastern China. Most are not traded internationally, or are traded in 
very small numbers. In general, threats to these species are from 
habitat destruction and local use. Ninety-eight percent of the 
international trade that does occur is in artificially propagated 
plants. However, in 1985, one shipment involving 40,000 individuals of 
artificially propagated C. armandii, an endangered species, was 
recorded. In view of the potential for large-scale trade in this 
species, the United States is considering supporting this proposal with 
the exception of C. armandii.
    Prop. 11.2. Deletion of Frerea indica from Appendix II. Submitted 
by Switzerland. Proposed U.S. position: Support.
    This species is endemic to India. Only a few individuals exist in 
the wild. It is highly endangered by fire, grazing, natural disaster, 
and insects. International trade does not appear to affect this species 
as it is not collected from the wild for export. F. indica appears in 
trade only in small numbers, and as artificially propagated specimens. 
It is easily propagated through seeds and stem cuttings. To the United 
States' knowledge, India has not expressed opposition to this deletion.
    Prop. 11.3. Deletion of Byblis spp. from Appendix II. Submitted by 
Australia. Proposed U.S. position: Support.
    Most of the five species of Byblis are found in remote locations in 
Australia and are of little horticultural value, though some are sought 
by carnivorous plant enthusiasts. Limited trade in wild-collected 
specimens of this taxon has occurred since it was originally listed. 
Small quantities of seed are permitted to be harvested from State lands 
in Australia each year. At least four, if not all, of the species of 
this genus are annual and easily propagated by seed. In spite of 
unsubstantiated reports of illegal collection from the wild in 
Australia, these species are considered secure and adequately protected 
as the only serious concern for this genus regards the southern form of 
Byblis gigantea, which would remain subject to export controls, 
according to Australian law.
    Prop. 11.4. Transfer of Disocactus macdougalli from Appendix I to 
II. Submitted by Switzerland. Proposed U.S. position: Support.
    This species, endemic to Mexico, has been found to be more abundant 
than once thought. It is not threatened by international trade as it is 
not of interest to collectors. In addition, Mexico prohibits the export 
of all wild-collected specimens of this species, so Appendix II listing 
would provide the same amount of protection to this species as it has 
currently. International trade in this species is negligible and is 
solely limited to artificially propagated plants. It is easily grown 
from seed. Habitat destruction is the main threat to this species.
    Prop. 11.5. Transfer of Sclerocactus mariposensis from Appendix I 
to II. Submitted by Switzerland. Proposed U.S. position: Oppose.
    This species is native to the United States. It is listed as 
Threatened under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA), in part due to 
the significant reduction and extirpation of sites of this taxon by 
amateur and commercial collectors. The U.S. Recovery Plan for the 
species specifically recommends that CITES protection be maintained at 
the highest possible level. International demand for this species is 
documented in U.S. CITES Annual Report data for the years 1994-1997, 
which indicate an average of 48 export shipments of artificially 
propagated seeds of Sclerocactus mariposensis per year, with an average 
of 2,225 seeds per shipment, primarily to Europe and Japan. The 
Management Authority of Switzerland has provided us with additional 
information on the distribution and abundance of S. mariposensis in 
Mexico, where it is apparently more secure than once thought. In 
addition, the results of a recent study of S. mariposensis, which came 
to our attention since we conducted our review of this species, suggest 
that its classification under the Endangered Species Act may warrant 
reconsideration. The United States will consider proposing to transfer 
this species to Appendix II in the future, pending continued monitoring 
of trade and clarification of its status in the wild. The United States 
believes that such an action would be premature at this time, however, 
particularly since strict control of trade is currently recommended for 
recovery. The United States has already informed the Plants Committee 
and the CITES Secretariat of its opposition to this proposal.
    Prop. 11.6. Deletion of Cephalotus follicularis from Appendix II. 
Submitted by Australia. Proposed U.S. position: Support.
    Estimates of the frequency and abundance populations of Cephalotus 
follicularis, a carnivorous plant endemic to southwestern Australia, 
suggest that there are many hundreds of populations each consisting of 
many thousands of individuals. This species is commonly cultivated by 
insectivorous plant enthusiasts and commercial nurseries in Australia, 
as it is easily propagated from small segments of rhizomes. Trade data 
indicates that the limited international trade in this species is 
confined to artificially propagated plants. This species is adequately 
protected in its area of endemism. Australian law will continue to 
regulate collection from the wild and impose export controls.
    Prop. 11.7. Transfer of Dudleya stolonifera and Dudleya traskiae 
from Appendix I to II. Submitted by Switzerland. Proposed U.S. 
position: Oppose.
    These species are native to the United States. Dudleya stolonifera 
is listed as Threatened under the Endangered Species Act. It has an 
extremely restricted range and is considered Endangered by the World 
Conservation Union (IUCN). The majority of D. stolonifera populations 
appear to be declining due to habitat loss and collection. The Pacific 
Northwest Regional Office of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 
``strongly supports continued inclusion in Appendix I for reasons of 
limited species distribution, accessibility, and interest in this 
species from collectors and the nursery trade.'' Dudleya traskiae is 
listed as Endangered under the Endangered Species Act, and is 
considered Endangered by the IUCN. D. traskiae populations are at least 
stable and may be increasing, but are so restricted in their 
distribution that any collection could lead to extirpation. The 
Recovery Plan for D. traskiae recognizes collection as a major risk for 
this species. Though these species are not known to be in legal 
international trade at this time, potential international demand exists 
for all Dudleya species. The United States believes current CITES 
protections should be maintained for these species, and that they 
continue to meet the criteria for retention in Appendix I, under 
Resolution Conf. 9.24. The United States has already

[[Page 12417]]

informed the Plants Committee and the CITES Secretariat of its 
opposition to this proposal.
    Prop. 11.8. (a) Change the listings of Cyatheaceae spp. to Cyathea 
spp. and (b) Change the listing of Dicksoniaceae spp. to Dicksonia spp. 
(the Americas only) and Cibotium barometz. Submitted by Switzerland. 
Proposed U.S. position: Support both (a) and (b).
    Tree ferns are found throughout the tropics. About 60 species 
appear in international trade, 10 of which are traded in significant 
numbers. All of the species in the Cyatheaceae family that are traded 
on a relatively large scale are members of the genus Cyathea, which 
would still be protected by CITES if this proposal is adopted. Since 
identifying the products of Cyathea spp. found in trade to the species 
level is difficult, protection for the entire genus should be 
maintained. Due to look-alike reasons, the United States supports 
maintaining listing for all Dicksonia spp. in the Americas in order to 
ensure protection for Dicksonia sellowiana, a species from South 
America of conservation concern. Trade in other species of Dicksonia 
originates in Australia and New Zealand where these species are 
adequately protected. The United States also supports maintaining 
protection for Cibotium barometz, which is widely traded for medicinal 
purposes. All species of tree ferns native to the United States are in 
the genera Cyathea and Dicksonia and would still be protected under 
CITES.
    Prop. 11.9. Deletion of Shortia galacifolia from Appendix II. 
Submitted by Switzerland. Proposed U.S. position: Undecided; need to 
consult further with relevant States.
    This species is native to the United States. Populations of Shortia 
galacifolia have been lost in the past due to horticultural collection 
and multiple dam construction projects. This species has a very limited 
distribution, but is locally common where it is found. It is listed as 
Endangered in the States of Georgia and North Carolina, and is 
considered Vulnerable by the IUCN. However, S. galacifolia is fairly 
widely cultivated and not known to be internationally traded. For these 
reasons, the United States could possibly support the recommendation of 
the Plants Committee to remove this species from Appendix II. The 
United States does, however, need to consult the States prior to making 
a decision on this proposal. The United States has already informed the 
the Plants Committee and the Secretariat of its concerns.
    Prop. 11.10. Deletion of Lewisia cotyledon, Lewisia maguirei, and 
Lewisia serrata from Appendix II. Submitted by Switzerland. Proposed 
U.S. position: Oppose.
    These species are native to the United States. Lewisia cotyledon is 
apparently secure, but factors exist to cause some concern regarding 
this species. The U.S. Forest Service cites collection from the wild 
for the horticultural trade as one of the primary activities that could 
pose a threat to this species. In addition, the Forest Service has 
documented specific, though limited, instances of collection pressure 
on some varieties of this species (especially Lewisia cotyledon var. 
heckneri). This taxon is found in international trade, but it is also 
fairly widely grown, and most L. cotyledon plants and seeds for sale 
come from cultivated sources. Lewisia maguirei has a very limited range 
and is considered Endangered by the IUCN. However, it is protected from 
most threats, including collection pressures, by its remote habitat. L. 
maguirei is considered of interest to alpine plant enthusiasts, so 
potential international demand exists for this species, though it is 
very rarely cultivated and not known to be in trade at this time. 
Lewisia serrata is considered Very Rare and Endangered throughout its 
range by the California Native Plant Society and Vulnerable by the 
IUCN. Though monitoring indicates that some populations are currently 
stable, the Forest Service reports that horticultural collection is a 
potential threat, and that at least one population is suspected to have 
been extirpated by illegal collection for this purpose.
    The Forest Service's Interim Management Guide for Lewisia 
cantelovii and Lewisia serrata cites poaching of L. serrata by private 
or commercial collectors as a potential threat to its existence. L. 
serrata is likely to be cultivated to a limited extent and traded 
internationally on a small scale, though no exports have been recorded 
in recent years. Due to the potential for international trade in 
specimens collected from the wild, the United States believes that 
Appendix II offers these three species valuable protection, even though 
no legal trade in wild-collected individuals of these species has been 
recorded in recent years. The United States has already informed the 
Plants Committee and the Secretariat of its opposition to this 
proposal.
    Prop. 11.11. Deletion of Darlingtonia californica from Appendix II. 
Submitted by Switzerland. Proposed U.S. position: Oppose.
    This species is native to the United States. Although it is 
generally not known to be declining in distribution or abundance, the 
Forest Service has informed us that collection is a definite threat to 
this species and that many of the plants in trade are likely to have 
been collected from the wild. International demand for Darlingtonia 
californica clearly exists due to documented international trade in 
artificially propagated specimens. Though no legal trade in wild-
collected plants has been recorded in recent years, this species is 
still subject to collection from the wild for international trade. 
Therefore, we consider Appendix II to be appropriate at this time, 
although we intend to review this species for possible delisting prior 
to COP12. The United States has already informed the Plants Committee 
and the Secretariat of its opposition to this proposal.
2. Proposals concerning export quotas for specimens of species in 
Appendix I or II [Doc. 11.59.2]

    Prop. 11.12. Maintenance of the Tanzanian population of Crocodylus 
niloticus (Nile crocodile) in Appendix II, with an annual export quota 
of 1,600. Submitted by Tanzania. Proposed U.S. position: Undecided.
    We are continuing to evaluate this proposal, pending our evaluation 
of the results of discussions at the Crocodile Specialist Group meeting 
in Cuba in January 2000.

3. Other proposals [Doc. 11.59.3]

    Prop. 11.13. Transfer of Manis crassicaudata, Manis pentadactyla, 
and Manis javanica (Asian pangolins) from Appendix II to I. U.S. 
proposal cosponsored by India, Nepal, and Sri Lanka.
    Prop. 11.14. Transfer of Tursiops truncatus ponticus (Bottlenose 
dolphin, Black Sea/Sea of Azov population) from Appendix II to I. U.S. 
proposal cosponsored by Georgia.
    Prop. 11.15-11.18. Transfer of following stocks of whales from 
Appendix I to Appendix II: Eastern North Pacific stock of Eschrichtius 
robustus (gray whales), and Southern Hemisphere, Okhotsk Sea -West 
Pacific, and North-east Atlantic and North Atlantic Central stocks of 
Balaenoptera acurostrata (minke whales). Submitted by Japan and Norway. 
U.S. position: Oppose.
    The United States opposes the downlisting of these populations of 
whales, which are subject to the International Whaling Commission (IWC) 
moratorium on commercial whaling. The United States continues to 
believe that it is inappropriate to consider these species for 
downlisting until the IWC completes the revision of its management 
regime in order to bring all whaling under effective IWC control, as 
discussed below. The United States

[[Page 12418]]

also believes that these species do not qualify for transfer to 
Appendix II, under Annex 4 of Resolution Conf. 9.24. The discussion 
that follows relates to all four of these proposals.
    The United States believes that CITES should honor the request for 
assistance in enforcing the moratorium which the IWC communicated to 
the CITES Parties in a resolution passed at the Special Meeting of the 
IWC in Tokyo, December, 1978. This request was answered by the CITES 
Parties in Resolution Conf. 2.9 (``Trade in Certain Species and Stocks 
of Whales Protected by the International Whaling Commission from 
Commercial Whaling''), which calls on the Parties to ``agree not to 
issue any import or export permit or certificate'' for introduction 
from the sea under CITES for primarily commercial purposes ``for any 
specimen of a species or stock protected from commercial whaling by the 
International Convention for the Regulation of Whaling.'' Resolution 
Conf. 2.9 was overwhelmingly reaffirmed by the Parties at COP10, by the 
defeat of a draft resolution proposed by Japan to repeal this 
resolution. At the 50th meeting of the IWC subsequent to COP10, the IWC 
passed a resolution that expressed its appreciation for the 
reaffirmation of this link between the IWC and CITES. IWC Resolution 
IWC/51/43 also welcomes the CITES COP10 decision ``to uphold CITES 
Resolution Conf. 2.9.'' Support for these requests of the IWC 
necessitate opposition to any proposal to transfer whale stocks to 
Appendix II.
    Additionally, according to Resolution Conf. 9.24, Annex 4, 
Precautionary Measures, paragraph 2.B. a. ``Even if such species do not 
satisfy the relevant criteria in Annex 1, they should be retained in 
Appendix I unless * * * the species is likely to be in demand for 
trade, but its management is such that the Conference of the Parties is 
satisfied * * * with I) implementation by the range States of the 
requirements of the Convention, in particular Article IV; and ii) 
appropriate enforcement controls and compliance with the requirements 
of the Convention.'' Unfortunately, these ``appropriate enforcement 
controls,'' as part of a Revised Management Scheme, have not yet been 
adopted by the IWC. These whale stocks do not qualify for transfer to 
Appendix II, under Resolution Conf. 9.24.
    The assumption in the downlisting proposal for these populations of 
minke whales and gray whales is that the differences within species are 
discrete, occur in all individuals, and can be readily differentiated 
by forensic DNA methods. The United States disagrees scientifically 
with the statement that the precautionary measures of Resolution Conf. 
9.24 Annex 4 are fulfilled because DNA analysis techniques allow for 
the identification of whale stocks, and even individual whales. This is 
not the case, as the experts who have developed these methods will 
attest and the scientific literature reinforces. While clear markers 
differentiate species, finding forensic markers for all individuals 
within a population or stock is much more problematic. Doing so is 
usually possible only when the population distinctiveness approaches 
that of species. Moreover, the use of Japanese and Norwegian DNA 
registers that are not available for scrutiny by other whale DNA 
experts is counter to all principles of forensic identification. Only 
when there is agreement on DNA markers, tested against adequate sample 
sizes of the whale stocks in question, could they be utilized for 
verification purposes. This research may show significant evolutionary 
units within some stocks, and it may also show significant gene flow 
between stocks making forensic identification of a meat sample to a 
particular stock impossible.
    The previous IWC management regime was not effective in managing 
the whaling industry. While it was in place, the whaling industry 
drastically depleted whale stocks until many became threatened with 
extinction. Since the establishment of the moratorium on global 
whaling, coupled with the CITES Appendix I listings, the Commission has 
continued to work on activities that the United States believes must be 
completed before commercial whaling can even be considered. This 
management regime must include devising an observation and monitoring 
program to ensure that quotas are not exceeded. Thus, the United States 
opposes even considering the downlisting of any whale species until the 
IWC has taken steps to create and institutionalize a revised management 
regime that brings all whaling under effective IWC monitoring and 
control.
    Prop. 11.15. Transfer of the Eastern North Pacific stock of 
Eschrichtius robustus from Appendix I to II. Submitted by Japan. 
Proposed U.S. position: Oppose.
    The gray whale's range previously encompassed the Atlantic and 
Pacific Oceans. The Atlantic population was hunted to extinction by the 
early 1900s, restricting the gray whale to shallow waters of the 
Pacific Ocean. Two stocks are recognized in the North Pacific, the 
western stock or Korean stock, which ranges along the Siberian coast 
and in the southern Chukchi and northern Bering Seas, and the eastern 
or California stock, which ranges from the Russian Federation past 
Canada and the United States to Mexico. The United States opposes this 
proposed downlisting for the following reasons. As a range state, Japan 
consulted the United States on their draft of this proposal, and the 
United States provided Japan its comments and opposition to this 
proposal. You may obtain that correspondence on our web site. Japan 
noted the United States' opposition in its proposal but did not 
elaborate on the United States submission. The United States 
understands that Mexico, as a range state as well, also provided its 
comments in opposition to the draft proposal, although they were not 
incorporated or even noted by Japan in the final proposal. In addition 
to the above comments, the United States notes that the proposal states 
that the species should be transferred to Appendix II because the 
United States removed the species from our domestic Endangered Species 
Act. This action, in itself, it not adequate justification for CITES 
downlisting, especially since the grey whale remains fully protected by 
our Marine Mammal Protection Act.
    Prop. 11.16. Transfer of the Southern Hemisphere stock of 
Balaenoptera acutorostrata from Appendix I to II. Submitted by Japan. 
Proposed U.S. position: Oppose.
    According to this proposal, range States for this population are 
Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Chile, Comoro, Congo, Ecuador, Fiji, 
France, Gabon, Indonesia, Kenya, Madagascar, Mauritius, Mozambique, 
Namibia, New Zealand, Papua New Guinea, Peru, Seychelles, South Africa, 
Tanzania, the United States, the United Kingdom, Uruguay, and Vanuatu. 
The United States opposes this proposal. The United States disagrees 
scientifically with the statement in the proposal that ``DNA analysis 
technique advanced enough to distinguish individual whales are already 
available and will be used to track and control the movements of the 
whale specimens.'' No such techniques are available, and full 
transparency and publication of all DNA sequences by the Government of 
Japan is vital to fully evaluate this contention. As a range state, 
Japan consulted the United States on their draft of this proposal, and 
the United States provided Japan its comments and opposition to this 
proposal. You may obtain that correspondence on our web site. Japan 
noted the United States' opposition in its proposal but did not 
elaborate on the United States' submission.
    Prop. 11.17. Transfer of the Okhotsk Sea--West Pacific stock of 
Balaenoptera acutorostrata from Appendix I to II.

[[Page 12419]]

Submitted by Japan. Proposed U.S. position: Oppose.
    According to this proposal, range States for this population are 
Canada, the People's Republic of China, Indonesia, Korea, Marshall 
Islands, the Philippines, the Russian Federation, and the United 
States. The United States opposes this proposal. As a range state, 
Japan consulted the United States on their draft of this proposal, and 
the United States provided Japan its comments and opposition to this 
proposal. You may obtain that correspondence on our web site. Japan 
noted the United States opposition in its proposal but did not 
elaborate on the United States' submission.
    Prop. 11.18. Transfer of the North-east Atlantic stock & the North 
Atlantic Central stock of Balaenoptera acutorostrata from Appendix I to 
II. Submitted by Norway. Proposed U.S. position: Oppose.
    According to the Norwegian proposal, range States for these 
populations are Belgium, Denmark (including the Faroe Islands and 
Greenland), France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, the Netherlands, Norway, 
Portugal, the Russian Federation, Spain, Sweden and the United Kingdom. 
The United States opposes this proposal. The United States is concerned 
scientifically with the statement in the proposal that ``Norway has 
established a trade control system based on DNA analysis techniques 
with samples taken from each individual whale.'' No such system is 
available, and full transparency and publication of all DNA sequences 
by the Government of Norway is vital to fully evaluate this contention.
    Prop. 11.19. Deletion of Parahyaena (Hyaena) brunnea (Brown hyaena) 
from Appendix II. Submitted by Namibia and Switzerland. Proposed U.S. 
position: Support.
    The brown hyaena is not found in significant numbers in 
international trade. It was transferred from Appendix I to Appendix II 
at COP9, with the ultimate goal of removing the species entirely from 
the Appendices after trade was monitored for at least two intervals 
between meetings of the Conference of the Parties (in compliance with 
precautionary measures provided in Annex 4 of Resolution Conf. 9.24). 
According to trade data in the proposal, less than three live specimens 
and four dead specimens were traded annually from 1994 through 1997. 
The United States agrees with the proponents that the species does not 
satisfy the criteria for listing or retention in Appendix II.
    Prop. 11.20. Transfer the South African population of Loxodonta 
africana (African elephant) from Appendix I to II, with annotations for 
trade. Submitted by South Africa. Proposed U.S. position: Undecided.
    South Africa has proposed the transfer to Appendix II of its 
population of elephants, allowing for: (1) trade in raw ivory under a 
quota of 30 tonnes of whole tusks of government-owned stock originating 
from Kruger National Park; (2) trade in live animals for reintroduction 
purposes; (3) trade in hides and leather goods; and (4) trade in 
hunting trophies for noncommercial purposes. The United States is 
continuing to evaluate this proposal, in the context of all species 
proposals relevant to the African elephant (11.20-11.25), and other 
relevant documents (Documents 11.26, 11.31.1, 11.31.2, 11.31.3, and 
11.31.4). These issues are very complex, particularly since this 
proposal requests an annotation that allows for commercial ivory trade. 
When we completed this notice, we still had not received all of the 
relevant documents to be evaluated at COP11 dealing with ivory trade, 
and the United States is continuing to evaluate the impact of decisions 
and proposals adopted at COP10.
    Prop. 11.21. Maintain the Botswana population of Loxodonta africana 
(African elephant) in Appendix II, with annotations for trade. 
Submitted by Botswana. Proposed U.S. position: Undecided.
    Botswana's population was transferred to Appendix II at COP10, with 
an annotation that, among other aspects, allowed for a one-time sale of 
ivory stocks to Japan. Botswana has proposed to amend that annotation 
to allow for commercial trade in government-owned stocks of ivory to 
``CITES-approved trading partners who will not re-export and subject to 
an annual quota of 12 tonnes (12,000 kg) of ivory.'' The United States 
is continuing to evaluate this proposal, in the context of all 
proposals relevant to the African elephant (11.20-11.25), and other 
relevant documents (Documents 11.26, 11.31.1, 11.31.2, 11.31.3, and 
11.31.4). These issues are very complex, particularly since this 
proposal requests increased commercial ivory trade. When we completed 
this notice, we still had not received all of the relevant documents to 
be evaluated at COP11 dealing with ivory trade, and the United States 
is continuing to evaluate the impact of decisions and proposals adopted 
at COP10.
    Prop. 11.22. Maintain the Namibia population of Loxodonta africana 
(African elephant) in Appendix II, with annotations for trade. 
Submitted by Namibia. Proposed U.S. position: Undecided.
    Namibia's population was transferred to Appendix II at COP10, with 
an annotation that, among other aspects, allowed for a one-time sale of 
ivory stocks to Japan. Namibia has proposed to amend that annotation to 
allow for commercial trade in government-owned registered stocks of raw 
ivory (whole tusks and pieces), to ``trading partners that have been 
verified by the CITES Secretariat to have sufficient national 
legislation and domestic trade controls to ensure that ivory imported 
from Namibia will not be re-exported and will be managed according to 
all requirements of Resolution Conf. 10.10 concerning domestic 
manufacturing and trade,'' with an annual quota of 2,000 kg ivory. The 
United States is continuing to evaluate this proposal, in the context 
of all species proposals relevant to the African elephant (11.20-
11.25), and other relevant documents (Documents 11.26, 11.31.1, 
11.31.2, 11.31.3, and 11.31.4). These issues are very complex, 
particularly since this proposal requests increased commercial ivory 
trade. When we completed this notice, we still had not received all of 
the relevant documents to be evaluated at COP11 dealing with ivory 
trade, and the United States is continuing to evaluate the impact of 
decisions and proposals adopted at COP10.
    Prop. 11.23. Maintain the Zimbabwe population of Loxodonta africana 
(African elephant) in Appendix II, with annotations for trade. 
Submitted by Zimbabwe. Proposed U.S. position: Undecided.
    Zimbabwe's population was transferred to Appendix II at COP10, with 
an annotation that, among other aspects, allowed for a one-time sale of 
ivory stocks to Japan. Zimbabwe has proposed to amend that annotation 
to allow for commercial trade in stocks of raw ivory (whole tusks and 
pieces), ``to trading partners with adequate controls and enforcement 
measures,'' with an annual quota of 10,000 kg ivory. The United States 
is continuing to evaluate this proposal, in the context of all species 
proposals relevant to the African elephant (11.20-11.25), and other 
relevant documents (Documents 11.26, 11.31.1, 11.31.2, 11.31.3, and 
11.31.4). These issues are very complex, particularly since this 
proposal requests increased commercial ivory trade. When we completed 
this notice, we still had not received all of the relevant documents to 
be evaluated at COP11 dealing with ivory trade, and the United States 
is continuing to evaluate the impact of decisions and proposals adopted 
at COP10.
    Prop. 11.24. Transfer to Appendix I all populations of Loxodonta 
africana

[[Page 12420]]

(African elephant) currently listed in Appendix II. Submitted by India 
and Kenya. Proposed U.S. position: Undecided.
    The United States is continuing to evaluate this proposal, in the 
context of all species proposals relevant to the African elephant 
(11.20-11.25), and other relevant documents (Documents 11.26, 11.31.1, 
11.31.2, 11.31.3, and 11.31.4). When we completed this notice, we still 
had not received all of the relevant documents to be evaluated at COP11 
dealing with ivory trade, and the United States is continuing to 
evaluate the impact of decisions and proposals adopted at COP10.
    Prop. 11.25. Amend the annotation concerning Appendix II 
populations of Loxodonta africana (African elephant), regarding the 
destination of live animals. Submitted by Switzerland. Proposed U.S. 
position: Undecided.
    The United States is continuing to evaluate this proposal, in the 
context of all proposals relevant to the African elephant (11.20-
11.25), and relevant documents (Documents 11.26, 11.31.1, 11.31.2, 
11.31.3, and 11.31.4). The United States believes that this proposal 
should be considered together with Document 11.26, submitted by Kenya, 
and also dealing with the conditions of live animals in trade under an 
annotation that specifies that commercial trade is allowed to 
``suitable and acceptable destinations.'' The United States also 
supports Doc. 11.24, ``Use of Annotations in the Appendices,'' which 
was drafted and adopted as a consensus document of the Standing 
Committee (see discussion, above). That document recommends that the 
Parties not include live animals in these annotations. The United 
States believes that the meeting of the COP must evaluate and discuss 
and decide on this issue, prior to discussion of either this proposal 
or Doc. 11.26. The United States believes that when a species is 
transferred from Appendix I to Appendix II with substantive 
annotations, commercial trade in live animals that requires findings on 
the part of the importing country or determinations of conditions in 
the importing country should not be included in the annotation.
    Prop. 11.26. Transfer the Australian population of Dugong dugon 
(Dugong) from Appendix II to Appendix I. Submitted by Australia. 
Proposed U.S. position: Support.
    Dugongs were once widely distributed in the tropical and 
subtropical coastal areas of the Indian Ocean and the southwest 
Pacific. The species' range extends from eastern Africa and Madagascar 
east to the eastern coast of Australia and Vanuatu, and north to the 
Ryukyu Archipelago, Japan. The species has been extirpated or is 
extremely rare in much of its former range, largely because of over 
hunting. All subpopulations of dugong, other than the one inhabiting 
coastal Australia, are currently listed in Appendix I. Australia 
currently protects its dugong population through domestic commercial 
harvest prohibitions, and researchers estimate stock size at 85,000 
individuals. Some regional populations near the southern Great Barrier 
Reef have dropped by more than 50 percent in the last decade, but in 
general the Australian stock is considered to be stable and among the 
most abundant known.
    Although Australian dugongs may not qualify for inclusion in 
Appendix I on the basis of trade threats or population status, 
Australia and two regional range countries (Indonesia and Madagascar) 
believe that transferring the Australian population to Appendix I will 
assist in regional law enforcement and antipoaching efforts, and 
simplify CITES permit issuance. Eight other range countries consulted 
by Australia (Brunei, Cambodia, China, Philippines, Singapore, Solomon 
Islands, Vanuatu, and Yemen) also support the proposed transfer. In 
addition, Resolution Conf. 9.24, adopted by the CITES parties in 1997, 
specifically recommends that ``split-listings'' (those involving 
multiple populations of a species listed in different Appendices) 
should be avoided where possible. For these reasons, the United States 
supports the Australian proposal.
    Prop. 11.27. Transfer all Bolivian populations of Vicugna vicugna 
(Vicuna) that are in Appendix I to Appendix II. Submitted by Bolivia. 
Proposed U.S. position: Support, with zero quota for trade in cloth 
from newly downlisted populations. See discussion under Prop. 11.28.
    Prop. 11.28. Delete the zero quota for trade in cloth from Bolivian 
Vicugna vicugna (Vicuna) populations in Appendix II. Submitted by 
Bolivia. Proposed U.S. position: Support provisional quota for three 
populations downlisted in 1997, with the quota reevaluated at the next 
CITES Conference of the Parties.
    Three vicuna populations were transferred from Appendix I to 
Appendix II at COP10, with a zero quota for trade in fiber or fiber 
products. Bolivia appears to have the necessary legal mechanisms in 
place to control harvest and trade in fiber, and this proposal 
describes what appears to be an adequate control and monitoring system 
to minimize illegal harvest and ensure that illegally obtained fiber 
does not enter legal trade. However, Bolivia has not yet started to 
harvest fiber from its vicuna populations. Thus, there is no evidence 
that the control and monitoring systems they describe are actually 
working. A provisional quota for the three populations downlisted in 
1997 will give Bolivia the opportunity to put its system into 
operation, evaluate its effectiveness, and make any necessary changes 
prior to implementing a country-wide harvest program. During debate at 
COP11, the United States will suggest that Bolivia take this measured 
approach.
    Prop. 11.29. Transfer to Appendix I all Moschus spp. (Musk deer) 
populations currently listed in Appendix II. U.S. proposal cosponsored 
by India and Nepal.
    Our proposed negotiating position is discussed in the Federal 
Register notice of February 17, 2000 (65 FR 8190). The United States 
will work for adoption of this document by the Parties.
    Prop. 11.30. Include in Appendix I all subspecies of Ovis vignei 
(Urial) not yet listed in the Appendices. Submitted by Germany. 
Proposed U.S. position: Undecided.
    The United States is continuing to review information contained in 
the proposal, and the relevant literature and information available on 
this species. Ovis vignei vignei is currently included in Appendix I, 
and other subspecies are unlisted. The United States' initial 
scientific evaluation questions whether all subspecies qualify for 
inclusion in Appendix I, or whether some should be included in Appendix 
II. The United States does believe, however, that all unlisted 
subspecies should be included in one of the two Appendices. We are 
leaning toward a split listing on the basis of country populations 
rather than subspecies.
    Prop. 11.31. Transfer Argentine populations of Rhea pennata 
(Pterocnemia pennata pennata) (Lesser rhea) from Appendix I to II. 
Submitted by Argentina. Proposed U.S. position: Support.
    The United States believes that this species does not meet any of 
the criteria in Annex 1 of Resolution Conf. 9.34, but does meet the 
criteria of Annex 4, B.2.b. Based on survey data from one of the four 
provinces where the subspecies occurs naturally, Argentina estimates 
that 1,687,253 lesser rheas exist in the entire country. Density 
estimates have increased in recent times from 0.2 to 2.2 adults per 
square kilometer. Argentina's proposal would allow trade in specimens 
only from rhea farms registered with Argentinian authorities (19 farms 
are now registered) and located within the subspecies natural

[[Page 12421]]

range. No individuals will be removed from the wild, except for eggs 
needed as parental stock. All animals will be individually identified 
using microchips. Argentina developed a ``Conservation and Management 
Program for the Patagonian Rhea'' in 1996. As part of this management 
program, Argentina intends to conduct annual or biennial surveys of 
rhea populations. Three of the four Argentinian provinces where the 
subspecies occurs have laws regulating the establishment of rhea farms 
and the sustainable management of Pterocnemia pennata pennata, and the 
fourth province (Neuquen) is currently drafting such a law. Other 
subspecies of the rhea appear to be distinguishable through physical 
traits. Chile, the only other range state, supports Argentina's 
proposal.
    Prop. 11.32. Transfer the North American population of Falco 
rusticolus (Gyrfalcon) from Appendix I to II, with a zero quota for 
export of wild birds. U.S. proposal.
    Our proposed negotiating position is discussed in the Federal 
Register notice of February 17, 2000 (65 FR 8190). The United States 
will work for adoption of this document by the Parties.
    Prop. 11.33. Transfer Eunymphicus cornutus cornutus from Appendix 
II to I. Submitted by France. Proposed U.S. position: Support (comments 
below, under Prop. 11.34).
    Prop. 11.34. Transfer Eunymphicus cornutus uveaensis from Appendix 
II to I. Submitted by France. Proposed U.S. position: Support.
    At the request of New Caledonia, France has submitted these two 
proposals to transfer the two subspecies of horned parakeet, 
Eunymphicus cornutus cornutus and E. c. uveaensis, to Appendix I from 
Appendix II. A similar proposal, to transfer only E. c. uveaensis to 
Appendix I, was submitted by Germany for consideration at COP10, but 
was withdrawn. The United States had opposed the transfer of only one 
subspecies to Appendix I, resulting in a split-listing, because of 
difficulties in distinguishing between the two subspecies in trade. 
However, transfer of the entire species to Appendix I would eliminate 
this problem, and the United States is considering supporting these 
proposals pending the receipt of recently published information to help 
assess the status of the species.
    Prop. 11.35. Inclusion of Garrulax canorus in Appendix II. 
Submitted by China. Proposed U.S. position: Support.
    The People's Republic of China has submitted this proposal to 
include Garrulax canorus (the hwamei) in Appendix II. The hwamei is a 
passerine species primarily kept as a songbird in China, although the 
species had been exported up until August 1998. Although the majority 
of specimens are traded domestically (estimated 1.7-1.8 million birds 
annually), over 125,000 birds were authorized for export during 1990-
1997. The species is one of the more common species in China, where it 
exists in a dozen provinces, as well as on Hainan Island and Taiwan, 
and it also occurs in Vietnam and Lao PDR. Although the United States 
is considering supporting this proposal, the United States is seeking 
any additional information that might be available on the status of 
this species in the wild and the impact of trade on the species, and, 
in particular, the value of an Appendix-II listing for the conservation 
of this species.
    Prop. 11.36. Inclusion of Cuora spp. (Southeast Asian box turtles) 
in Appendix II (Cuora amboinensis, Cuora flavomarginata, Cuora 
galbinifrons and Cuora trifasciata under II.2.a.; Cuora aurocapitata, 
Cuora mccordi, Cuora pani, Cuora yunnanensis, and Cuora zhoui under 
II.2.a. or II.2.b. Submitted by Germany and cosponsored by the United 
States.
    Our proposed negotiating position is discussed in the Federal 
Register notice of February 17, 2000 (65 FR 8190). The United States 
will actively work towards adoption of this proposal at COP11.
    Prop. 11.37. Inclusion of Clemmys guttata (spotted turtle) in 
Appendix II. U.S. proposal.
    Our proposed negotiating position is discussed in the Federal 
Register notice of February 17, 2000 (65 FR 8190). The United States 
will actively work towards adoption of this proposal at COP11.
    Prop. 11.38. Transfer of Geochelone sulcata (African spurred 
tortoise) from Appendix II to I. Submitted by France. Proposed U.S. 
position: Support.
    The United States supports this proposal, as the species satisfies 
the criteria of Annex 1, C.i) and C.ii) of Resolution Conf. 9.24. The 
total wild population has declined from an estimated 100,000 African 
spurred tortoises in 1950 to just 18,000-20,000 currently. According to 
the World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC), import of wild 
specimens has also increased from 461 animals in 1990 to 5,097 in 1996; 
many of these were exported from three non-range countries: Togo, 
Ghana, and Cameroon.
    Prop. 11.39. Transfer of Malacochersus tornieri (Pancake tortoise) 
from Appendix II to I. Submitted by Kenya and cosponsored by the United 
States.
    Our proposed negotiating position is discussed in the Federal 
Register notice of February 17, 2000 (65 FR 8190). The United States 
will actively work towards adoption of this proposal at COP11.
    Prop. 11.40. Transfer the ``Cuban population'' of Eretmochelys 
imbricata (Hawksbill sea turtle) from Appendix I to II, with annotation 
for: (1) export of registered stocks (6,900 kg) to Japan only, and (2) 
the export each year thereafter, to Japan or to other Parties with 
equivalent controls, which will not reexport, up to 500 specimens. 
Submitted by Cuba and Dominica. Proposed U.S. position: Oppose.
    Although the United States recognizes and appreciates the 
considerable efforts made by Cuba to conserve sea turtles in the 
Caribbean, the United States cannot support this proposal. As a range 
country, the United States provided comments to Cuba, based on the 
information provided to us in a proposal summary dated September 27, 
1999; those comments are available on our web site. Existing 
information shows that the Caribbean regional population of hawksbill 
sea turtle is composed of genetically distinct stocks. Analyses of 
genetic samples taken from hawksbill turtles on foraging grounds across 
the region have revealed conclusively that these genetically distinct 
stocks are mixed on their feeding grounds. Samples collected from 
hawksbill turtles inhabiting foraging grounds in Cuba reveal that 30 
percent to 58 percent of these individuals did not originate on Cuban 
nesting beaches. The United States is particularly concerned with the 
harvest of turtles in Cuban waters that are genetically aligned with 
source nesting populations in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. 
Detailed systematic surveys that can begin to assess nesting trends in 
Cuba have only recently started, the extent to which the Cuban harvest 
has impacted populations outside of Cuba is also largely unknown, and 
the United States is concerned that the current (and proposed) harvest 
is unsustainable, and threatens hawksbills throughout the Caribbean. 
Hawksbill populations are declining or depleted in 22 of the 26 
geopolitical units in the Wider Caribbean area for which some status 
and trend information is available. Globally, the species has 
experienced a decline of 80 percent in the last 3 generations (105 
years), and it is unlikely that more than 15,000 females nest annually. 
The species has therefore been categorized by the IUCN as critically 
endangered.
    Based on our current understanding of the status of the hawksbill 
in the

[[Page 12422]]

Caribbean, the United States does not believe it prudent for any range 
country to be harvesting hawksbills for domestic or international 
consumption. The United States is very concerned that any reopening of 
the hawksbill shell trade will undermine hawksbill conservation efforts 
not only in the Caribbean, but around the world. Based on CITES annual 
report data and other information, the illegal trade of hawksbill 
turtle products, as well as other sea turtle species, is the highest 
volume, most widespread, most long-term, and persistent illegal trade 
of any CITES Appendix I species in the Convention's 25-year history. 
The United States is unable to confirm that adequate enforcement 
controls are in place to prevent illegal trade in hawksbill turtle (or 
other sea turtle) specimens from Cuba or other hawksbill sea turtle 
range states in the Wider Caribbean, if an Appendix II listing were 
adopted by the meeting of the COP. The species does not qualify for 
transfer to Appendix II under Conf. 9.24: it both satisfies the 
biological criteria of Annex 1 for inclusion in Appendix I 
(particularly paragraphs C and D), and does not satisfy the 
precautionary measures in Annex 4 paragraph B.2.b. of Conf. 9.24.
    Prop. 11.41. Transfer the ``Cuban population'' of Eretmochelys 
imbricata (Hawksbill sea turtle) from Appendix I to II, with annotation 
allowing export in one shipment of registered stocks (6,900 kg) to 
Japan only. Submitted by Cuba. Proposed U.S. position: Oppose.
    Please see the discussion under Prop. 11.40; all comments are the 
same. The United States notes further that Cuba has submitted two 
proposals, that specify different sets of proposed annotations for the 
same species. The United States believes that, for a Party to submit 
more than one proposal for the same species or population, somehow 
hedging its bets that if the Parties do not adopt the first they might 
adopt the second, is not appropriate. The Rules of Procedure of the 
meeting of the COP allow a Party to amend a proposal, prior to voting, 
and that is the more appropriate avenue. The United States believes 
that a more appropriate course of action is for Cuba to decide which 
proposal it would like the meeting of the COP to consider, and to 
withdraw the other. This procedural view is independent of the United 
States' position on the specifics of this proposal.
    Prop. 11.42. Transfer Crocodylus moreletii (Morelet's crocodile) 
populations of Sian Ka'an, Quintana Roo, Mexico from Appendix I to II. 
Submitted by Mexico.
    Mexico has formally withdrawn its proposal to transfer a population 
of Morelet's crocodile (Crocodylus moreletii) from Appendix I to II. 
Mexico informed us that they withdrew the proposal on January 24, 2000. 
Mexico withdrew this proposal in response to recommendations made by 
the IUCN Crocodile Specialist Group during its January 17-20, 2000 
meeting in Varadero, Cuba.
    Prop. 11.43. Transfer of Varanus melinus from Appendix II to I. 
Submitted by Germany. Proposed U.S. position: Support.
    This species is currently affected by increasing levels of trade 
and also meets the biological criteria in Annex 1 of Resolution Conf. 
9.24. The wild population has a restricted area of distribution on 
several islands of the Sula Archipelago in Indonesia, the quality of 
habitat within its range has decreased, due to commercial logging. 
Furthermore, the species is particularly attractive to the pet trade 
due to its attractive coloration, its ``tameness,'' and manageable 
size. Finally, a decline in the number of individuals is projected, 
based on a decrease in the area and quality of habitat, and an 
increased level of exploitation for the pet trade.
    Prop. 11.44. Inclusion of Crotalus horridus (Timber rattlesnake) in 
Appendix II. U.S. proposal.
    Our proposed negotiating position is discussed in the Federal 
Register notice of February 17, 2000 (65 FR 8190). The United States 
will actively work towards adoption of this proposal at COP11.
    Prop. 11.45. Deletion of Bufo retiformis (Sonoran green toad) from 
Appendix II. U.S. proposal.
    Our proposed negotiating position is discussed in the Federal 
Register notice of February 17, 2000 (65 FR 8190). The United States 
will actively work towards adoption of this proposal at COP11.
    Prop. 11.46. Inclusion of Mantella spp. (Mantella frogs) in 
Appendix II (Mantella aurantiaca is already in Appendix II). Jointly 
submitted by The Netherlands and the United States.
    Our proposed negotiating position is discussed in the Federal 
Register notice of February 17, 2000 (65 FR 8190). The United States 
will actively work towards adoption of this proposal at COP11.
    Prop. 11.47. Inclusion of Rhincodon typus (Whale shark) in Appendix 
II. U.S. proposal.
    Our proposed negotiating position is discussed in the Federal 
Register notice of February 17, 2000 (65 FR 8190). The United States 
will actively work towards adoption of this proposal at COP11.
    Prop. 11.48. Inclusion of Carcharodon carcharias (Great white 
shark) in Appendix I. Submitted by Australia and cosponsored by the 
United States.
    Our proposed negotiating position is discussed in the Federal 
Register notice of February 17, 2000 (65 FR 8190). The United States 
will actively work towards adoption of this proposal at COP11.
    Prop. 11.49. Inclusion of Cetorhinus maximus (Basking shark) in 
Appendix II. Submitted by the United Kingdom of Great Britain and 
Northern Ireland. Proposed U.S. position: Support.
    The Basking Shark is widely distributed in coastal waters and on 
the continental shelves of temperate zones in the northern and southern 
hemisphere. The species is planktivorous (feeds on plankton), 
ovoviviparous (bears a small number of live young), and is the second 
largest fish in the world. The biology of the species makes it 
especially vulnerable to exploitation. It has a slow growth rate, a 
long time to sexual maturity (approximately 12-20 years), a long 
gestation period (1-3 years) with a similar interval between 
pregnancies, low fecundity, and probably small populations. 
Traditionally, basking sharks have been hunted for their liver, which 
yields an oil rich in squalene. This market is now largely superseded, 
but the demand for the fins has increased. The IUCN lists C. maximus as 
Vulnerable in the 1996 IUCN Red List based on past records of declining 
populations, due to overexploitation of fisheries, slow recovery rates, 
and the potential for similar declines to occur in the future due to 
targeted and by-catch fisheries.
    There are no directed fisheries for basking sharks in the United 
States. Since 1997, fishing for and retention of basking sharks has 
been prohibited by regulation in Atlantic waters. The prohibition was 
implemented as a precautionary measure to ensure that directed 
fisheries would not develop. Basking sharks are not regulated in a 
Fisheries Management Plan (FMP) in U.S. Pacific waters, but the Pacific 
Fishery Management Council is considering the development of an FMP for 
highly migratory species in the area the Council covers.
    This species meets the criteria listed for inclusion of species in 
Appendix II in Conference Resolution 9.24, Annex 2a, Bi, that ``it is 
known, inferred and projected that harvesting of specimens from the 
wild for international trade has, or may have, a detrimental impact on 
the species by exceeding, over an

[[Page 12423]]

extended period, the level that can be continued in perpetuity.''
    Prop. 11.50. Inclusion of Latimeria spp. (Coelacanth) in Appendix 
I. Submitted by France and the Federal Republic of Germany. Proposed 
U.S. position: Support.
    The species Latimeria chalumnae was included in Appendix I in 1989. 
Coelacanths (Latimeria spp.) are the sole survivors of the ancient 
Devonian lineage of crossopterygian fish, which played a pivotal role 
in the evolution of land-living tetrapods. According to the latest IUCN 
Red List of Threatened Animals, the global status of the species 
Latimeria chalumnae is Endangered, due to its small population size and 
limited distribution. Only a small breeding population exists off two 
islands of the Comoros Archipelago in the western Indian Ocean. The 
same must be assumed for Latimeria menadoensis, considering that only 
two specimens have been caught so far. Without protection in Appendix 
I, trade in this genus (excluding L. chalumnae) is possible and likely 
to exist if specimens become more available. Latimeria is probably one 
of the most sought after fish genera for collectors and scientists and, 
when occasionally offered in trade, may be confused with a deep sea 
grouper sought in Traditional Chinese Medicine. Due to a small 
population size and a limited distribution, any commercial trade in 
coelacanths will likely damage the existing population seriously. 
Inclusion in Appendix I would prohibit commercial trade and tightly 
regulate trade for scientific, educational, or public display purposes.
    Prop. 11.51. Inclusion of Latimeria menadoensis (Menado coelacanth) 
in Appendix I. Submitted by Indonesia. Proposed U.S. position: Support 
if Prop. 11.50 is not adopted.
    This proposal will be unnecessary if the proposal to list the 
Latimeria spp. is approved. However, the United States proposes to 
support this proposal if the Latimeria spp. listing proposal is not 
adopted.
    Prop. 11.52. Inclusion of Poecilotheria spp. (Eastern hemisphere 
tarantulas) in Appendix II. U.S. proposal cosponsored by Sri Lanka.
    Our proposed negotiating position is discussed in the Federal 
Register notice of February 17, 2000 (65 FR 8190). The United States 
will actively work towards adoption of this proposal at COP11.
    Prop. 11.53. Harmonize exemptions for medicinal products: combine 
current annotation #2 for Podophyllum hexandrum and Rauvolfia 
serpentina with annotation #8 for Taxus wallichiana. Submitted by 
Switzerland. Proposed U.S. position: Support.
    This proposal offers a more precise and consistent definition of 
those parts and derivatives of selected medicinal plant species that 
are exempted from the controls of the treaty. The United States expects 
that standardizing annotations will facilitate enforcement of CITES for 
medicinal plants. The United States is not aware of any negative 
conservation implications of this proposal.
    Prop. 11.54. Inclusion of Panax ginseng (Ginseng) roots in Appendix 
II. Submitted by Russian Federation. Proposed U.S. position: Support.
    Historically, the species was found in China, Korea, and Russia. 
However, the species is now believed to be extinct in China and Korea. 
The amount (by weight) of wild ginseng harvested and exported from 
Russia has decreased substantially during the 1990s. The official 
harvest quota decreased from 100 kg in 1993 to 0 kg in 1998, but 
poaching has increased. The species is currently listed as endangered 
under the Red Book of the Russian Federation. Currently, an export 
permit issued by the Russian Federation Trade Ministry is needed. 
American and Siberian ginseng are almost indistinguishable.
    Prop. 11.55. Transfer of the Argentine population of Araucaria 
araucana from Appendix II to Appendix I. Submitted by Argentina. 
Proposed U.S. position: Support.
    Populations of Araucaria araucana, a pine tree found in Chile and 
Argentina, are restricted and highly threatened in Argentina. This 
species qualifies for inclusion in Appendix I. Appendix I listing would 
assist in regulating international trade in seeds of this species, 
which have been confiscated in large volumes in recent years. It would 
also harmonize the listing for this species with the Chilean 
population, which is already in Appendix I. This listing would make 
enforcement of CITES easier and more effective for this species. This 
action also supports Resolution Conf. 9.24, which states that split-
listings should be avoided whenever possible.
    Prop. 11.56. Exempt up to three specimens of rainsticks (Cactaceae, 
Echinopsis and Eulychnia) per person from CITES controls. Submitted by 
Chile. Proposed U.S. position: Oppose.
    Cacti rainsticks are products manufactured from dead specimens of 
several species of columnar cacti, including Chilean species in the 
genera Echinopsis and Eulychnia. All species in these two genera are 
listed in Appendix II of CITES. The raw material from these cacti, 
called ``normata,'' are dead and dried skeletal parts of these plants 
collected in the wild and then processed in Chile into the products 
known as rainsticks (or musical sticks). The dried skeletal parts of 
Chilean Echinopsis and Eulychnia species make excellent specimens for 
manufacturing this type of handicraft because they have central 
cavities ideal for filling and producing the characteristic musical 
effect, which sounds like falling rain.
    The primary market for rainsticks is as novelty items for sale in 
gift and souvenir shops, both in Chile and in other countries to which 
the rainsticks have been exported (including the United States). The 
international trade in cacti rainsticks is in part commercial, for the 
gift shop market, and in part noncommercial, as personal effect 
souvenirs purchased by tourists.
    The trade in rainsticks was an issue for discussion at the past 
several meetings of the CITES Plants Committee. At the 9th meeting of 
the Plants Committee in June 1999, the Committee recognized the problem 
of tourists purchasing cacti rainsticks as souvenirs in countries that 
they are visiting and then having them confiscated when they return to 
their home countries because they did not obtain CITES permits for the 
export of these Appendix II items. To address this problem, Chile 
recommended preparation of a proposal to exempt shipments of up to 
three units of Chilean Echinopsis and Eulychnia cacti rainsticks from 
the provisions of CITES, specifically when being transported by 
tourists as long as the tourists had the products with them. The Plants 
Committee agreed that such an exemption did not pose a conservation 
problem for the species involved, since the skeletal parts used to 
produce the rainsticks are collected from specimens in the wild that 
are already dead and dried, and supported the proposal by Chile. Chile 
has subsequently submitted a proposal to COP11 to exempt up to three 
specimens of Echinopsis and Eulychnia cacti rainsticks per person from 
CITES controls.
    The United States agrees with the Plants Committee's assessment 
that such an exemption would not pose a conservation problem for the 
species involved. However, the United States does not agree that this 
exemption should be proposed to the Conference of the Parties via an 
annotation to the CITES Appendices, as Chile has done by submitting its 
proposal. CITES Article VII, paragraph 3, already allows the imports 
and exports of Appendix II cacti rainsticks as personal effects and, 
therefore, including a personal effects exemption as an annotation to a 
listing would circumvent or overrule those

[[Page 12424]]

Parties that have deliberately chosen not to recognize personal effects 
exemptions under their domestic legislation.
    The United States believes that the appropriate avenue for such an 
exemption to be considered by the Parties is through a proposed 
resolution. Inclusion of the exemption as a recommendation in a 
resolution would allow Parties the option of implementing the exemption 
or not implementing it. A precedent already exists in Resolution Conf. 
10.12, regarding conservation of sturgeon, which includes a 
recommendation for a personal effects exemption for caviar for up to 
250 grams per person, similar to the cacti rainstick exemption being 
proposed by Chile.
    The United States believes that Chile's rainstick exemption 
proposal should be considered via a proposed amendment to CITES 
Resolution Conf. 9.18 (Rev), regarding regulation of trade in plants. 
This resolution already includes a section recommending an exemption 
for flasked seedlings of orchid species listed in Appendix I, and the 
rainstick exemption could be added as another recommendation.
    Should this exemption be adopted as an amendment to Conf. 9.18 
(Rev.), the United States is concerned whether plant inspection 
officials at ports of import and export will be able to differentiate 
Echinopsis and Eulychnia rainsticks from rainsticks made from other 
species. The United States plans to investigate this matter with plant 
inspectors of the U.S. Department of Agriculture prior to the United 
States formulating its final negotiating position on this proposal.
    Prop. 11.57. Deletion of Kalmia cuneata (White wicky) from Appendix 
II. U.S. proposal.
    Our proposed negotiating position is discussed in the Federal 
Register notice of February 17, 2000 (65 FR 8190). The United States 
will actively work towards adoption of this proposal at COP11.
    Prop. 11.58. Inclusion of Camptotheca acuminata in Appendix II. 
Submitted by China. Proposed U.S. position: Support.
    This tree, once widely distributed throughout southern China, has 
been significantly reduced in its distribution and abundance primarily 
by habitat destruction and harvest for Camptothecin, an alkaloid used 
to treat AIDS and some types of cancer. This species is widely 
artificially propagated, though not on a commercial scale outside of 
China. No synthetic substitute exists for Camptothecin. China is, 
therefore, the sole source of Camptothecin for the international 
market. Estimates of average annual Camptothecin production in China 
suggest that at least 500,000-750,000 trees per year are affected. 
Appendix II listing could benefit this species if it pertains to all 
parts and derivatives of the plant.
    Prop. 11.59. Inclusion of Cistanche deserticola in Appendix II. 
Submitted by China. Proposed U.S. position: Support.
    This species is a parasitic herb native to China that is used to 
improve kidney function and treat impotence. The main threats to it are 
overexploitation from the wild for its medicinal value and the 
destruction of its host plants, Haloxylon ammondendron and H. persicum. 
Cistanche deserticola has been severely impacted by over collection 
from the wild in certain areas, especially in the Inner Mongolia 
Autonomous Region. It is now listed in the Red Data Book of China 
Plants and as a State Protected Species. International trade in this 
species grew to an estimated 120 tons per year in the 1980s, but has 
since declined due to supply restrictions. It is primarily exported to 
Japan, Hong Kong, and Southeast Asia. This species is difficult to 
cultivate due to its parasitic nature and is not artificially 
propagated on a commercial scale.
    Prop. 11.60. Inclusion of Harpagophytum procumbens and 
Harpagophytum zeyheri in Appendix II. Submitted by Germany. Proposed 
U.S. position: Support.
    These species are found in several countries in southern Africa, 
but mainly in Namibia and Botswana. A decline in wild populations of 
Harpagophytum procumbens has been recorded in both these countries. A 
main threat to H. procumbens is the large-scale harvest of its 
secondary storage tubers using detrimental harvesting techniques, 
primarily for international markets. Export of H. procumbens from its 
main range states is significant and strongly increasing and has led to 
its overexploitation in Botswana and some parts of Namibia. The 
material in trade originates exclusively from the wild. Most of it is 
exported to Europe. H. zeyheri is also traded internationally for its 
medicinal value and is difficult to distinguish from H. procumbens. 
Grazing also presents a threat to these species.
    Prop. 11.61. Inclusion of Adonis vernalis in Appendix II (potted 
live plants to be excluded). Submitted by Germany. Proposed U.S. 
position: Support, with the exception of the exclusion of live potted 
plants.
    This species, primarily used for medicinal purposes but also valued 
as an ornamental plant, is distributed throughout the steppe and 
grassland ecosystems of central and eastern Europe. It mainly occurs in 
isolated, fragmented populations today. It is considered to be 
threatened and is included in most red data books of its range 
countries. The many threats to this species include overexploitation 
for international trade and detrimental harvesting techniques. 
Bulgaria, Hungary, Romania, Ukraine, and Russia are the main exporters 
of this species. The main importers are Germany and France. 
Restrictions on harvest have been established in Bulgaria and Hungary. 
Almost all plant material in trade originates from wild stock. 
Regarding the proposed exclusion of potted live plants, we sympathize 
with the intent, but do not believe it is allowed by the treaty. CITES 
Article I paragraph (b)(iii) states that, for plants, a specimen is 
defined as: ``for species included in Appendix I, any readily 
recognizable part or derivative thereof; and for species included in 
Appendices II and III, any readily recognizable part or derivative 
thereof specified in Appendices II and III in relation to the 
species.'' Therefore, the listing of a plant species in Appendix II can 
specify (or exempt) certain recognizable parts or derivatives. The 
listing cannot, however, exempt whole plants that are in pots, which is 
not a part or derivative.
    Prop. 11.62. Transfer of Guaiacum sanctum (Holywood lignum vitae) 
from Appendix II to Appendix I. U.S. proposal.
    Our proposed negotiating position is discussed in the Federal 
Register notice of February 17, 2000 (65 FR 8190). The United States 
will actively work towards adoption of this proposal at COP11.

Conclusion of the Meeting

60. Determination of the time and venue of the next regular meeting of 
the Conference of the Parties [Doc. 11.60]
    When we completed this notice, we still had not received a document 
from the Secretariat regarding candidates as host governments for 
COP12. The United States favors holding COP12 in a country where all 
Parties and observers will be admitted without political difficulties. 
The United States proposes to support the holding of the meetings of 
the COP on a biennial basis, or, as in the case of COP10, after an 
interval of approximately 2\1/2\ years.
61. Closing remarks [no document]

Future Actions

    Before COP11, we will announce any changes to the proposed 
negotiating

[[Page 12425]]

positions contained in this notice and any undecided negotiating 
positions by posting a notice on our Internet website (http://
international.fws.gov/global/cites.html). After the meeting of the COP, 
we will publish a notice in the Federal Register announcing the 
amendments to CITES Appendices I and II that were adopted by the 
Parties at the meeting, and requesting comments on whether the United 
States should enter reservations on any of these amendments.

    Dated: March 3, 2000.
Jamie Rappaport Clark,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 00-5617 Filed 3-3-00; 4:32 pm]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P