[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 105 (Friday, June 1, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30606-30623]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-2714]


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

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); Fourteenth 
Regular Meeting; Tentative U.S. Negotiating Positions for Agenda Items 
and Species Proposals Submitted by Foreign Governments and the CITES 
Secretariat

AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: We, the United States, as a Party to the Convention on 
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora 
(CITES), will attend the fourteenth regular meeting of the Conference 
of the Parties to CITES (CoP14) in The Hague, The Netherlands, June 3-
15, 2007. This notice announces the tentative U.S. negotiating 
positions on amendments to the CITES Appendices (species proposals), 
draft resolutions and decisions, and agenda items submitted by other 
countries and the CITES Secretariat for consideration at CoP14. With 
this notice we also announce that we will publish a notice after the 
conclusion of CoP14 to invite public input on whether the United States 
should take a reservation on any of the amendments to the CITES 
Appendices that are adopted.

DATES: In further developing U.S. negotiating positions on these 
issues, we will continue to consider information and comments submitted 
in response to our notice of February 21, 2007 (72 FR 7904). We will 
also continue to consider information received at the public meeting 
announced in that notice, which was held on April 9, 2007. We will 
publish a notice after June 15, 2007, to invite public input on whether 
the United States should take a reservation on any of the amendments to 
the CITES Appendices that are adopted.

ADDRESSES: Comments pertaining to draft resolutions and decisions, and 
agenda items should be sent to the Division 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]; or via fax at: 
703-358-2298. Comments pertaining to species proposals should be sent 
to the Division 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]; or via fax at: 703-358-
2276. Comments and materials received will be available for public 
inspection, by appointment, from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through 
Friday, at either the Division of Management Authority or the Division 
of Scientific Authority.

Reservations

    With this notice, we announce that we will publish a notice after 
the conclusion of CoP14 to invite public input on whether the United 
States should take a reservation on any of the amendments to the CITES 
Appendices that are adopted.

Available Information

    Information concerning the results of CoP14 will be available after 
the close of the meeting on the Secretariat's Web site at http://www.cites.org; or upon request from the Division of Management 
Authority; or on our CITES Web site (http://international.fws.gov/cites/cites.html).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information pertaining to 
resolutions and agenda items contact: Chief, Branch of CITES 
Operations, Division of Management Authority; telephone, 703-358-2095; 
fax, 703-358-2298; e-mail, [email protected]. For information pertaining to 
species proposals contact: Chief, Division of Scientific Authority; 
telephone, 703-358-1708; fax, 703-358-2276; e-mail, 
[email protected].

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild 
Fauna and Flora (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 become threatened 
with extinction due to trade. These species are listed in the 
Appendices to CITES, which are available on the CITES Secretariat's Web 
site at http://www.cites.org/eng/app/index.shtml. Currently, 171 
countries, including the United States, are Parties to CITES. The 
Convention calls for regular meetings of the Conference of the Parties 
(CoP) to review issues pertaining to implementation, makes provisions 
enabling the CITES Secretariat 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 to 
improve the effectiveness of CITES. Any country that is a Party to 
CITES may propose and vote on amendments to Appendices I and II 
(species proposals), draft resolutions and decisions, and agenda items 
submitted for consideration by the Conference of Parties. Accredited 
nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) may participate in the meeting as 
approved observers and may speak during sessions when recognized by the 
meeting Chairman, but they may not vote or submit proposals.
    This is our fourth in a series of Federal Register notices that, 
together with announced public meetings, provide you with an 
opportunity to participate in the development of U.S. tentative 
negotiating positions for CoP14. In this notice we announce the 
tentative U.S. negotiating positions on species proposals, draft 
resolutions and decisions, and agenda items submitted by other Parties 
and the Secretariat for consideration at CoP14. We published our first 
CoP14-related Federal Register notice on January 20, 2006 (71 FR 3319), 
and with it we requested information and recommendations on species 
proposals, draft resolutions and decisions, and agenda items for the 
United States to consider submitting for consideration at CoP14. We 
published our second such Federal Register notice on November 7, 2006 
(71 FR 65126), and with it we requested public comments and information 
on species proposals, draft resolutions and decisions, and agenda items 
that the United States was considering submitting for consideration at 
CoP14. On December 11, 2006, we held the public meeting announced in 
our second Federal Register notice; at that meeting, we discussed the 
issues contained in our November 7 Federal Register notice and in our 
Web site posting on the same topic. In our third Federal Register 
notice, published on February 21, 2007 (72 FR 7904), we announced the 
provisional agenda for CoP14, solicited public comments on items on the 
provisional agenda, and announced a public meeting to discuss

[[Page 30607]]

the agenda items. That public meeting was held on April 9, 2007.
    You may obtain information on the above Federal Register notices 
from the following sources. For information on draft resolutions and 
decisions, and agenda items, contact the Division of Management 
Authority (see ADDRESSES, above); and for information on species 
proposals, contact the Division of Scientific Authority (see ADDRESSES, 
above). Our regulations governing this public process are found in 50 
CFR 23.31-23.39. Pursuant to 50 CFR 23.38(a), the Director has decided 
to suspend the procedure for publishing a notice of final negotiating 
positions in the Federal Register because time and resources needed to 
prepare a Federal Register notice would detract from essential 
preparation for CoP14.

Tentative Negotiating Positions

    In this notice we summarize the tentative U.S. negotiating 
positions on proposals to amend the Appendices (species proposals), 
draft resolutions and decisions, and agenda items that have been 
submitted by other countries and the CITES Secretariat. Documents 
submitted by the United States for consideration of the Parties at 
CoP14 can be found on the Secretariat's Web site at: http://www.cites.org/eng/cop/index.shtml. Those documents are: CoP14 Doc. 
18.2, CoP14 Doc. 39, and CoP14 Doc. 43. The United States also 
submitted Document CoP14 Doc. 67 at the request of the Animals and 
Plants Committees. The United States, either alone or as a co-
proponent, submitted the following proposals to amend Appendices I and 
II: CoP14 Prop. 2, CoP14 Prop. 17, CoP14 Prop. 19, CoP14 Prop. 21, 
CoP14 Prop. 22, CoP14 Prop. 23, CoP14 Prop. 28, and CoP14 Prop. 36. In 
this notice, we will not provide any additional explanation of the U.S. 
negotiating position for documents that the United States submitted. 
The introduction in the text of each of the documents the United States 
submitted contains a discussion of the background of the issue and the 
rationale for submitting the document.
    In this notice, numerals next to each agenda item or resolution 
correspond to the numbers used in the agenda for CoP14 and posted on 
the Secretariat's Web site. When we completed the notice, the 
Secretariat had not yet made available documents for a number of the 
agenda items on the CoP14 agenda. For several other documents, we are 
still working with other agencies in the United States and other CITES 
Parties to develop the U.S. negotiating position. The documents for 
which we do not currently have tentative U.S. negotiating positions 
are: CoP14 Doc. 10 and CoP14 Doc. 30.
    In the discussion that follows, we have included a brief 
description of each species proposal, draft resolution, draft decision, 
and agenda item submitted by other Parties or the Secretariat, followed 
by a brief explanation of the tentative U.S. negotiating position for 
that item. New information that may become available prior to or at 
CoP14 could lead to modifications of these positions. The U.S. 
delegation will fully disclose changes in our negotiating positions and 
the explanations for those changes during public briefings at CoP14. 
The United States is concerned about the budgetary implications and 
workload burden that will be placed upon the Parties, the committees, 
and the Secretariat, and intends to evaluate all documents for CoP14 in 
view of these concerns.

Agenda (Provisional)

Opening Ceremony and Welcoming Addresses

    The Secretariat will not prepare a document on these agenda items. 
According to tradition, as the host country for CoP14, The Netherlands 
will conduct an opening ceremony and make welcoming remarks.

Administrative Matters

    1. Rules of Procedure (Doc. 1). Tentative U.S. negotiating 
position: Support. The CITES Secretariat prepared Document CoP14 Doc. 
1, the draft Rules of Procedure for CoP14. The draft Rules are 
identical to those adopted for CoP13, except for several amendments 
proposed to Rules 14 and 15, regarding the creation of the position of 
an Alternate Chairman of the Conference, and Rule 28, regarding 
submission of informative documents for the CoP. The United States 
tentatively supports the draft Rules of Procedure and the amendments 
proposed to Rules 14, 15, and 28, but plans to propose several 
additional amendments to the text of these three Rules to clarify 
several points.
    2. Election of Chairman and Vice-Chairmen of the meeting and of 
Chairmen of Committees I and II (No document). Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Undecided. According to tradition, the host 
country--in this case, The Netherlands--will provide the Conference 
Chairman. The United States will support the election of committee 
Chairmen and a Vice-Chairman of the Conference who have the required 
technical knowledge and skills and also reflect the geographic and 
cultural diversity of the CITES Parties.
    3. Adoption of the agenda (Doc. 3). Tentative U.S. negotiating 
position: Support.
    4. Adoption of the working programme (Doc. 4). Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Support. Prior to a CoP, the working programme is 
provisional and changes may be made to it prior to the start of CoP14 
or at the beginning of the CoP. The United States supports the 
provisional working programme posted at the time this notice was 
prepared.
    5. Credentials Committee
    5.1 Establishment of the Credentials Committee (No document). 
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided.
    5.2 Report of the Credentials Committee (No document). Tentative 
U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. The United States will follow the 
work of the Credentials Committee and intervene as appropriate.
    6. Admission of observers (Doc. 6). Tentative U.S. negotiating 
position: Undecided. A document for this agenda item is not normally 
distributed prior to the start of a CoP. National NGOs are admitted as 
observers if their headquarters are located in a CITES Party country 
and if the national government of that Party approves their attendance 
at the CoP. International NGOs are admitted by approval of the CITES 
Secretariat. After being approved as an observer, an NGO is admitted to 
the CoP unless one-third of the Parties object. The United States 
supports admission to the meeting of all technically qualified NGOs, 
and opposes unreasonable limitations on their full participation as 
observers at CoP14. In addition, the United States supports flexibility 
and openness in the process for disseminating documents produced by 
NGOs to Party delegates, which are vital to decision-making and 
scientific and technical understanding.
    7. Financing and budgeting of the Secretariat and of meetings of 
the Conference of the Parties. Tentative U.S. negotiating position on 
Agenda Items 7.1, 7.2, and 7.3: Undecided. These are comprehensive 
documents that require extensive review, internal discussion, and 
analysis of the financial implications for Parties and the impact on 
the work of the Secretariat and the committees. The United States will 
review the documents carefully, bearing in mind the need to balance 
tasks with available resources. The United States advocates fiscal 
responsibility and accountability on the part of the Secretariat and 
the Conference of the Parties and plans to be an active participant in 
the budget discussions at

[[Page 30608]]

CoP14. The voluntary annual contribution of the United States to CITES 
is determined through our domestic budgeting process. The United States 
believes it is necessary that the CITES Secretariat provide additional 
information on budgetary and financial matters in relation to the 
costed programme of work proposed in Document CoP14 Doc. 7.3. Until 
such information is provided and analyzed, and discussed with the 
Parties and the Secretariat, we will not be able to consider supporting 
any increase in the budget of the Convention.
    8. Committee Reports
    8.1 Report of the Chairman of the Standing Committee (Doc. 8.1). 
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: At the time this notice was 
prepared, this document had not been posted on the Secretariat's 
website. This report is largely a summary of activities conducted by 
the Standing Committee, or particularly the Chairman, since CoP13. Many 
of these activities are covered by other CoP14 agenda items.
    8.2 Report of the Chairman of the Animals Committee (Doc. 8.2). 
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Most of this document is a report 
by the Chairman of his activities or a recounting of the proceedings of 
meetings of the Animals Committee, and therefore not requiring a 
position. The outcomes of some of the Animals Committee deliberations 
are reflected in other agenda items for CoP14, where they are 
elaborated more substantially. However, there are some specific 
recommendations contained in the report requiring a position. These 
(and the tentative U.S. position) include:
     Draft decisions for Psittacus erithacus, derived from the 
Review of Significant Trade in this species, calling for the 
development of management plans by range countries, with assistance 
from the Secretariat, subject to external funding (Support);
     A draft decision for the Secretariat to convene, subject 
to external funding, a workshop to initiate regional cooperation on 
fisheries management for Tridacnidae (Support);
     Extending Decision 13.93 to continue the review of the 
Felidae, particularly the review of Lynx spp. and look-alike issues, 
until CoP15 (Support);
     Consider that the Parties, Animals Committee, and 
Secretariat have complied with Decisions 13.95-13.97 related to fossil 
corals (Support); and
     Consideration of providing supplemental funding (US$30,000 
annually) to the Chairman of the Animals Committee, especially if from 
a developing country and where governmental or institutional support is 
insufficient to fulfill the duties of the position (Unable to support 
given the current budgetary situation for the Convention).
    8.3 Report of the Chairman of the Plants Committee (Doc. 8.3). 
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Most of this document is a report 
by the Chairman of her activities or a recounting of the proceedings of 
meetings of the Plants Committee, and therefore not requiring a 
position. The outcomes of some of the Plants Committee deliberations 
are reflected in other agenda items for CoP14, where they are 
elaborated more substantially. However, there are some specific 
recommendations contained in the report requiring a position. These 
(and the tentative U.S. position) include:
     A draft decision directed to range countries, regional 
Plants Committee representatives, and the Secretariat to address the 
management and enforcement needs of seven species of medicinal plants 
from Asia, and to report on progress to the Plants Committee at its 
17th and 18th meetings (Support);
     Consideration by the Parties of ways to obtain 
identification materials for plants listed in the Appendices given that 
there is no longer a specific budget line for this activity (Support);
     A draft decision directed to the Plants Committee and the 
Secretariat to continue cooperation with the Convention on Biological 
Diversity on the Global Strategy for Plant Conservation (Support, as 
amended by the Secretariat);
     A draft decision directed to the Plants Committee to 
develop principles, criteria, and indicators for making non-detriment 
findings for timber and medicinal plant species (Support);
     Renewal of Decision 13.54, which directs the Plants 
Committee to continue to consider proposals to include additional 
timber species in the Appendices, based on the outcomes of regional 
workshops and other information (Support);
     Consideration that the Plants Committee's work under 
Decisions 13.51 and 13.52 regarding annotations of medicinal plants, 
Decision 13.60 related to Harpagophytum, and Decision 13.72 regarding 
monitoring effects of the revision of the definition of ``artificially 
propagated'' have been completed (Support);
     Draft decisions directed to the Parties and the Plants 
Committee to monitor the effects of exempting the artificially 
propagated hybrids of various orchid genera from CITES controls, and 
consideration of whether the exemption of hybrids of additional genera 
is advisable (Support); and
     Draft decisions directed to the Parties, Plants Committee, 
Secretariat, and inter-governmental and non-governmental organizations 
(IGOs and NGOs) to address various issues related to trade in agarwood, 
including capacity building, the making of non-detriment findings, 
information sharing, definition of terms relating to agarwood, 
development of identification and training materials, and 
recommendations on appropriate units of measure for agarwood, as well 
as consideration of potential annotations to exempt certain agarwood 
specimens from CITES controls (Support, but with reservations regarding 
the ability of the CoP to direct work to IGOs and NGOs, and also 
regarding the scope of work and potential budget implications).
    8.4 Joint report of the Chairmen of the Animals and Plants 
Committees (Doc. 8.4). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: U.S. 
position: Much of this document is a report by the Chairmen of the 
Animals and Plants Committees recounting the proceedings of joint 
meetings of the two committees, and therefore not requiring a position. 
The outcomes of some of the deliberations of the two committees meeting 
in joint session are reflected in other agenda items for CoP14, where 
they are elaborated more substantially. However, there are some 
specific recommendations contained in the report requiring a position. 
These (and the tentative U.S. position) include:
     Recommended Rules of Procedure for the two committees, 
which follow longstanding practices and represent the committees' views 
with regard to a practicable adaptation of the Rules of Procedure for 
the Standing Committee (Support, with some amendments proposed by the 
Secretariat);
     A draft decision directed to the Secretariat to publish 
and distribute, subject to available funding, manuals for regional 
representatives to the committees in the three languages of the 
Convention (Support, as amended by the Secretariat);
     A recommendation to eliminate Resolution Conf. 13.10 on 
``Trade in invasive alien species'' and incorporate elements of it into 
Resolution Conf. 10.4 on ``Cooperation and synergy with the Convention 
on Biological Diversity,'' to reflect the limited role CITES can play 
in addressing the problem of invasive species (Support); and
     Draft decisions directed to the Parties, Standing 
Committee, and Secretariat to provide support to the University of 
Cordoba and the International University of Andalusia

[[Page 30609]]

(Spain) to support the continuation of the Master's course on 
``Management, Access and Conservation of Species in Trade'' (Support).
    8.5 Report of the Nomenclature Committee (Doc. 8.5). Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Undecided. The report contains numerous 
recommendations regarding the adoption of standard nomenclatural and 
taxonomic references for CITES-listed fauna and flora, and a program of 
work and proposed budget for the next intersessional period. We are 
still evaluating the references, and the proposed work and budget 
implications.
    9. Committee Elections and Appointments
    9.1 Standing Committee (No document). Tentative U.S. negotiating 
position: Support. Since the close of CoP13, the North American region 
has been represented on the Standing Committee by Canada, serving as 
the North American regional representative, and Mexico, serving as the 
alternate representative. Canada and Mexico will continue to serve in 
their current capacities until the end of CoP15.
    9.2 Animals Committee (No document). Tentative U.S. negotiating 
position: Support. Since the close of CoP14, the North American region 
has been represented on the Animals Committee by Mr. Rodrigo A. 
Medellin of Mexico, serving as the North American regional 
representative, and up until May 2007, Mr. Robert R. Gabel of the 
United States, serving as the alternate representative. Mr. Gabel has 
now moved on to other duties as the Chief of the U.S. Management 
Authority, and as such, the United States will provide a new alternate 
representative who has yet to be determined.
    9.3 Plants Committee (No document). Tentative U.S. negotiating 
position: Support. Since the close of CoP14, the North American region 
has been represented on the Plants Committee by Mr. Robert R. Gabel of 
the United States, serving as the North American regional 
representative, and Dr. Adrianne Sinclair, of Canada, serving as the 
alternate representative.
    9.4 Nomenclature Committee (No document). Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Support. In its report to the CoP, the 
Nomenclature Committee recommends, as also recommended in CoP14 Doc. 12 
(on review of the scientific committees), submitted by the Standing 
Committee, that the Nomenclature Committee be re-characterized as a 
working group of the Animals and Plants Committees. However, we 
anticipate that this will have little effect on the operation of the 
Nomenclature Committee, and we expect the current Chairmen of this 
committee, Dr. Ute Grimm of Germany (co-Chairman for Fauna) and Dr. 
Noel McGuff of the United Kingdom (co-Chairman for Flora), to continue 
in their positions, regardless of how this body is characterized.

Strategic Matters

    11. CITES Strategic Vision: 2008-2013 (Doc. 11). Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: While the United States supports the revision and 
updating of both CITES' Strategic Plan and the accompanying Action 
Plan, we have significant concerns related to the revisions proposed in 
Document CoP14 Doc. 11, which we communicated in comments to the 
Strategic Plan Working Group (SPWG) following the 54th meeting of the 
CITES Standing Committee (SC54). CITES developed its current (and 
first) ``Strategic Vision Through 2005'' when the United States chaired 
the Standing Committee. This earlier document was adopted at CoP11 and 
was closely linked to an Action Plan, with practical and measurable 
steps for the Parties, Secretariat, and other entities. The Action Plan 
was developed in concert with the Strategic Vision to provide evidence 
that the goals of the latter were being met. At CoP13 the Parties 
adopted Decision 13.1, which extended the Strategic Vision through 
CoP14, but also set in motion the process to revise and update both the 
Strategic Vision and the Action Plan. Document CoP14 Doc. 11 represents 
the output of the SPWG, taking into account the comments received from 
Parties and NGOs on the draft Strategic Plan after SC54. The SPWG has 
also prepared a draft resolution for consideration by the Parties at 
CoP14 (Document Doc. 11 Annex, p. 4), and the ``CITES Strategic Vision: 
2008-2013'' is included as a sub-annex to that document (pp. 5-12). 
While the SPWG accepted some of the comments of the United States in 
preparing this document, we remain concerned that the document would 
direct CITES away from its core mission of monitoring and controlling 
international trade in wildlife and plants. Although the ``CITES 
Strategic Vision: 2008-2013'' does not prescribe or proscribe specific 
actions by the Parties, if adopted, it is intended to provide guidance 
for the evolution of CITES through 2013.
    12. Review of the scientific committees (Doc. 12). Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Support. This document is submitted by the 
Standing Committee. At SC54 in October 2006, the Committee adopted the 
recommendations of an External Evaluation Working Group's review of the 
CITES scientific committees (Animals, Plants, and Nomenclature), and 
agreed to propose to CoP14 pertinent modifications to Resolution Conf. 
11.1 (Rev. CoP13) and 12.11 (Rev. CoP13). The United States supports 
adoption of the Standing Committee's recommendations that will enhance 
the work and efficiency of the scientific committees. However, the 
United States disagrees with the Secretariat's suggestion to merge the 
scientific committees.
    13. Addis Ababa Principles and Guidelines for the Sustainable Use 
of Biodiversity (Doc. 13). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: 
Support. Document CoP14 Doc. 13 was prepared by the Plants and Animals 
Committees, and is based on the outcome of discussions at the 22nd 
meeting of the Animals Committee and 16th meeting of the Plants 
Committee (PC16--Lima, Peru; July 2006). The committees focused on the 
applicability of the Addis Ababa Principles and Guidelines for the 
Sustainable Use of Biodiversity (Addis Ababa Principles) to the making 
of non-detriment findings, and concluded that not all of the principles 
and guidelines are directly relevant. The committees proposed that 
Resolution Conf. 10.4 be amended to acknowledge the use of the Addis 
Ababa Principles as a voluntary additional tool that can be used in 
making non-detriment findings. The United States agrees with the 
committees' conclusion that the Addis Ababa Principles are not always 
applicable to the decision making process under CITES, and supports the 
proposal to consider them as a voluntary additional tool that can be 
used in making non-detriment findings.
    14. CITES and livelihoods (Doc. 14; Argentina, China, Germany on 
behalf of the European Community Member States, and Nicaragua). 
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. In Document CoP14 Doc. 
14, the proponents summarize the outcomes and recommendations from the 
CITES and Livelihoods Workshop (Cape Town, South Africa; September 
2006), and propose two draft decisions that build on those 
recommendations. The first draft decision directs the Standing 
Committee to assist in the development of tools and guidelines for the 
Parties to use in examining the impacts of CITES regulation on human 
well-being and the livelihoods of the poor. The second draft decision 
directs the Secretariat to provide an assessment of the ways in which 
the implementation of CITES has taken, or could take, into account 
these impacts on the livelihoods of the poor.

[[Page 30610]]

Although we are supportive of considering human well-being and 
livelihoods in the implementation of CITES, these considerations should 
be separate from the objective scientific assessments required for 
listings and making non-detriment findings. We are also concerned about 
the budget implications of the proposed Decisions in this document.
    15. National wildlife trade policy reviews (Doc. 15). Tentative 
U.S. negotiating position: Support. In Document CoP14 Doc. 15, the 
CITES Secretariat reported on progress made in implementing Decisions 
13.74 and 13.75 and that the four pilot countries interested in 
undertaking wildlife trade policy reviews, will be provided an 
opportunity to share compiled and synthesized information on the 
initial results from their wildlife trade policy reviews at a CoP14 
side event. The Secretariat further recommends that interested 
importing countries carry out national wildlife policy reviews in order 
to provide a balanced view to exporting countries and facilitate a 
better understanding of wildlife trade policy at both ends of the 
international wildlife trade (supply and demand), and invites donors to 
provide financial support to countries interested in preparing these 
reviews. The Secretariat recommends renewing the deadlines in 
Resolution Conf. 13.74 for reporting to the Standing Committee and 
Conference of the Parties to SC57 and CoP15, and deleting a 
recommendation calling for submission of project proposals in order to 
seek financial support for preparation of trade policy reviews in 
interested countries.
    The United States looks forward to reviewing the results achieved 
with the four pilot countries. However, given the overall lackluster 
response of the Parties (7 out of 171 Parties expressed interest), this 
is not high priority work of the CITES Secretariat. Implementation of 
the Secretariat's recommendations would have budgetary implications 
that must be weighed against priorities that are more urgent.
    16. Capacity building (Doc. 16). Tentative U.S. negotiating 
position: Oppose. This document from the CITES Secretariat proposes the 
creation of an interactive CITES Virtual College for basic and more 
advanced training in the Convention over the Internet. The Secretariat 
proposes that this program could be linked to academic institutions. In 
Document CoP14 Doc. 7.3 Annex 1, the CITES Secretariat estimates that 
it would cost close to $1.6 million to run this program from 2009 
through 2011. While the United States has always, and continues to be, 
a strong supporter and proponent of training in the implementation and 
enforcement of CITES, we do not support such an initiative with such 
significant budget implications. There are already similar educational 
and capacity-building programs and mechanisms that would be duplicated 
by the development of such a program at the Secretariat (e.g., the 
Masters and Doctoral courses conducted by the International University 
of Andalucia, and current U.S. training offered in connection to 
Regional Free Trade Agreements).
    17. Cooperation between Parties and promotion of multilateral 
measures (Doc. 17). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. At 
the time this notice was prepared, this document had not been posted on 
the Secretariat's Web site.
    18. Cooperation With Other Organizations
    18.1 Cooperation with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the 
United Nations (Doc. 18.1). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: 
Undecided on establishment of a Fishery Working Group within CITES; 
support strengthening cooperation between CITES and United Nations Food 
and Agriculture Organization (FAO) with regard to forestry and non-
timber forest products, but opposed to formalization of the 
relationship through a Memorandum of Understanding (MoU). This document 
was submitted by the CITES Secretariat. It provides a history of the 
collaboration between CITES and FAO regarding marine listing and 
implementation issues, and summarizes cooperative activities in recent 
years related to queen conch, sturgeons, sharks, sea cucumbers, and 
other species. Pointing to the success of collaborative efforts between 
CITES and FAO on marine issues, the Secretariat recommends 
strengthening cooperation with FAO on issues related to forestry and 
non-timber forest products. The document includes draft decisions for 
consideration by the Parties at CoP14. One of these decisions directs 
the Secretariat to initiate discussions with FAO on strengthening and 
formalizing cooperation between CITES and FAO with regard to forestry 
and non-timber forest products. Another, directed to the Standing 
Committee, would establish a Fishery Working Group to address practical 
issues related to the implementation of the Treaty for fish and marine 
invertebrates.
    The United States endorsed the establishment of the MoU with FAO on 
marine issues that was finalized at SC54, and we fully support ongoing 
cooperation between CITES and FAO regarding marine issues. FAO has 
provided valuable advice and assistance to CITES on a number of marine 
issues, including the development of listing criteria for marine 
species and the formation of ad hoc expert advisory panels to evaluate 
marine listing proposals prior to a CoP. We have endorsed the idea of a 
marine working group in the past; in fact, at CoP10, the United States 
submitted a document calling for the Standing Committee to establish a 
temporary working group for marine fish species. However, given the 
formalized cooperative arrangement with FAO, ongoing work in the 
Animals Committee, and the desire to avoid duplication of effort, we 
are uncertain of the need for establishing a Fishery Working Group 
within CITES at this time. No information has been provided regarding 
the proposed composition or the mandate of such a group. We will 
develop a position as more information becomes available.
    The International Tropical Timber Organization (ITTO) promotes the 
conservation and sustainable management of and trade in tropical forest 
resources. We submitted a document for consideration at CoP14 (Doc. 
18.2) that recognizes the importance of close cooperation between CITES 
and ITTO in the consideration and implementation of CITES listings of 
tropical timber species and recommends strengthening the cooperation 
between the CITES and ITTO Secretariats. While we would also support 
increased cooperation between CITES and ITTO regarding forestry and 
non-timber forest products, we do not believe that it is necessary to 
formalize the relationship through a MoU.
    18.3 Statements from representatives of other conventions and 
agreements (No document). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Not 
applicable.
    19. Dialogue Meetings
    19.1 Terms of reference for CITES dialogue meetings (Doc. 19.1). 
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. Range country dialogue 
meetings have occurred for the African elephant since 1996 and 
hawksbill sea turtles since 2001. The Standing Committee instructed the 
Secretariat to draft terms of reference for the organization and 
conduct of dialogue meetings for any taxon. The Secretariat's draft was 
reviewed at SC50 and approved with amendments at SC53 (July 2005). The 
Standing Committee agreed with the Secretariat that the revised 
document should be the basis for a draft resolution at CoP14. This 
document incorporates the suggestions from the Standing Committee and 
describes what a dialogue meeting is, who may call a

[[Page 30611]]

dialogue meeting, the organization of the meeting, how decisions are 
made and communicated, and how the rules of procedure may be amended. 
The United States participated in the SC53 discussions and generally 
supports the document.
    19.2 Results of the dialogue meeting on the African elephant (Doc. 
19.2). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Not applicable. The African 
elephant dialogue meeting is scheduled to be held in The Hague, The 
Netherlands, immediately prior to the start of CoP14. When the document 
is available, we will review it closely and develop our position. We 
support the range States dialogue process for debating multinational 
species issues, and the United States provided funding for this meeting 
through a grant under the African Elephant Conservation Act.

Interpretation and Implementation of the Convention

Review of Resolutions and Decisions

    20. Review of Resolutions
    20.1 Resolutions relating to Appendix-I species (Doc. 20.1). 
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. In Document CoP14 Doc. 
20.1, the Secretariat puts forward two draft consolidated resolutions 
relating to Appendix-I species. The first draft resolution is a 
consolidation of the resolutions related to hunting trophies for 
Appendix-I species, and the second draft resolution consolidates the 
resolutions related to the conservation of and trade in specimens of 
specific Appendix-I species. The United States has long supported the 
efforts to consolidate resolutions related to Appendix-I species, as 
long as such an approach continues to allow for the elaboration of 
specific measures that may be needed for individual species and does 
not result in a generic approach to the conservation of these rare and 
endangered species.
    20.2 General review (Doc. 20.2). Tentative U.S. negotiating 
position: Undecided. At the time this notice was prepared, Document 
CoP14 Doc. 20.2 was not available for review on the Secretariat's Web 
site. Prior to CoP12, the Secretariat began a review of the existing 
CITES resolutions to identify those that were difficult to implement, 
redundant with other resolutions, or with outdated text. At CoP12 and 
again at CoP13, the Secretariat proposed changes to and consolidations 
of sections of several resolutions, which the Parties considered, and 
some of which the Parties adopted. With Document CoP14 Doc. 20.2, the 
Secretariat is continuing this review process by identifying a number 
of resolutions for which it has proposed changes, consolidations, or 
transfers of text to other resolutions.
    21. Revision of Resolution Conf. 11.16 on ranching and trade in 
ranched specimens of species transferred from Appendix I to Appendix II 
(Doc. 21). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Oppose, but agree with 
some aspects. While the United States agrees that reporting 
requirements should request only appropriate information that is used 
to monitor ranching operations and to determine that such operations 
continue to meet the requirements agreed by the Parties in Resolution 
Conf. 11.16, we do not agree with eliminating the collection of needed 
information based on Parties' inability or unwillingness to submit a 
complete report. Annual reporting must include sufficient information 
to determine if ranching operations are having an adverse effect on 
wild populations and that population trends are stable or increasing.
    Regarding the revision to the definition of ``ranching,'' the 
United States agrees that the definition should be amended, but does 
not accept the proposed definition. The Parties should postpone a 
revision of the definition of ``ranching'' in Resolution Conf. 11.16 
until consideration of Document CoP14 Doc. 38, and if agreed, the 
review proposed in that document has been completed.
    22. Review of Decisions (Doc. 22). Tentative U.S. negotiating 
position: Undecided. At the time this notice was prepared, Document 
CoP14 Doc. 22 was not available for review on the Secretariat's Web 
site. At CoP13, the Parties reviewed the current CITES decisions to 
identify those that were long term in nature. For these long-term 
decisions, the Parties adopted the transfer of their text into new or 
existing resolutions. With Document CoP14 Doc. 22, the Secretariat is 
continuing this process by identifying existing decisions that are 
intended to be valid for a long term and making proposals for the 
transfer of the relevant texts of these decisions into new or existing 
resolutions.

Compliance and Enforcement Issues

    23. Guidelines for compliance with the Convention (Doc. 23). 
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. At CoP12, the Parties 
directed the Standing Committee to develop guidelines for compliance 
with the Convention and a working group was established at SC50 to 
accomplish the task. The United States has been an active member of the 
Working Group on Compliance and supports completion of the draft 
guidelines at CoP14. The existing compliance mechanisms in the Treaty 
and resolutions are effective and appropriate. We have worked to ensure 
that the guidelines for compliance accurately describe those mechanisms 
and do not go beyond what already exists by introducing new mechanisms 
or procedures. Although significant progress was made and agreement was 
reached on most of the text, some areas of disagreement remained after 
SC54. Document CoP14 Doc. 23 was prepared by the Chairman of the 
Working Group on Compliance and includes the draft guidelines and the 
Chairman's recommendations for resolving remaining areas of 
disagreement. The United States supports his recommendations because 
they focus the guidelines on describing existing practice instead of 
creating new compliance procedures.
    24. National laws for implementation of the Convention (Doc. 24). 
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. At the time this notice 
was prepared, this document had not been posted on the Secretariat's 
Web site. The United States strongly believes that the Convention's 
effectiveness is undermined when Party States do not have adequate 
national laws in place for implementing CITES, and we have previously 
supported action by the Conference of the Parties to compel Parties to 
adopt effective CITES implementing legislation.
    25. Enforcement matters (Doc. 25). Tentative U.S. negotiating 
position: Support. The United States supports the proposed decisions 
relating to a meeting of the CITES Enforcement Experts Group and the 
suggestion that Resolution Conf. 11.3 be revised. The United States 
agrees that existing efforts to capture illegal trade information have 
largely been unsuccessful and welcomes an opportunity to discuss the 
issue so that illegal trade activities are better understood and 
enforcement efforts to combat them are made more effective. The United 
States also concurs with the Secretariat's assessment that, despite 
remarkable efforts by dedicated wildlife enforcement officers around 
the world, governments need to raise the profile of wildlife 
enforcement and ensure that sufficient resources are devoted to 
interdiction of illegal trade and prosecution of wildlife criminals.
    26. Compliance and enforcement (Doc. 26; Germany, on behalf of the 
European Community Member States). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: 
Partial support. The United States agrees with many of the 
Secretariat's concerns. The United States does not believe it is 
necessary, at this point, to

[[Page 30612]]

establish a permanent Enforcement Experts Group. However, a second 
meeting of this group is warranted to follow up on previous 
recommendations and take up some of the issues identified in this 
document as well as enforcement-related documents, such as Document 
CoP14 Doc. 25 and Document CoP14 Doc. 28.
    27. Disposal of illegally traded and confiscated specimens of 
Appendix-II and -III species (Doc. 27; Indonesia). Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Oppose. The United States does not support the 
proposed decision directed to the Standing Committee regarding 
amendments to Resolution Conf. 9.10 (Rev. CoP13). Some of the issues 
raised in Document CoP14 Doc. 27 and the proposed decision are clearly 
addressed in existing resolutions. In addition, several of the issues 
identified as possible amendments would raise enormous logistical, 
financial, and workload challenges that would substantially outweigh 
any possible conservation benefit for Parties that regularly confiscate 
large volumes of wildlife. The proposed amendments to Resolution Conf. 
9.10 (Rev. CoP13) included in this document, if adopted, could have a 
negative conservation impact by discouraging Parties from confiscating 
illegally traded wildlife if they were required to take on the 
substantial logistical, financial, and workload burdens that would 
accompany these requirements.
    28. Internet trade in specimens of CITES-listed species (Doc. 27; 
Germany, on behalf of the European Community Member States). Tentative 
U.S. negotiating position: Support. The United States is concerned 
about the role of the Internet in illegal wildlife trade and has 
already devoted enforcement resources to this issue. The United States 
supports the Secretariat's alternative draft decisions, which would be 
a more efficient and cost-effective approach to the workshop.
    29. National reports (Doc. 29). Tentative U.S. negotiating 
position: Support with minor changes. With Document CoP14 Doc. 29, the 
Secretariat reports on progress it and the Parties have made since 
CoP13 in implementing Resolution Conf. 11.17 (Rev. CoP13) on national 
reports, and on progress it has made in implementing Decisions 13.90-
13.92 on reporting requirements. The Secretariat recommends that the 
Parties consider adopting two draft decisions included in Annex 2 of 
Document CoP14 Doc. 29. The first draft decision, which the United 
States supports, would direct the Standing Committee to undertake a 
review of the CITES recommendations to Parties to provide special 
reports, assess whether they might be effectively incorporated into the 
annual and biennial reports, and report to CoP15 on its conclusions and 
recommendations. The second draft decision would direct the Secretariat 
to continue work directed under Decision 13.92 to facilitate the 
harmonization of knowledge management and reporting with other 
biodiversity-related conventions. This draft decision would continue 
work directed under Decision 13.90 to identify ways to reduce reporting 
burdens on Parties. The United States supports both of these aspects of 
the draft decision. However, the second point of the draft decision 
also directs the Secretariat to support the Standing Committee on 
electronic permitting. The United States recognizes the potential 
benefits electronic permitting could provide in relation to national 
reports, but we are concerned about the potential financial impact on 
some Parties and the limited capacity of many Parties to completely 
implement electronic permitting (see the U.S. position on Document 
CoP14 Doc. 40.1 and Document CoP14 Doc. 40.2). Therefore, the United 
States, while supportive of most of the text of the second draft 
decision, does not support inclusion of the phrase ``* * * its support 
of the Standing Committee on electronic permitting* * *''
    31. Monitoring of the implementation of the annotations to 
Euphorbia spp. and Orchidaceae spp. included in Appendix II (Doc. 31; 
Switzerland). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. Switzerland 
has submitted a proposal for CoP14 to amend the annotation to 
Orchidaceae (Prop. 34), and another proposal to amend the annotation to 
Euphorbia spp. (Prop. 29). In Document CoP14 Doc. 31, Switzerland 
explains that, if these two proposals are adopted, then it would be 
appropriate to renew Decisions 13.98 and 13.99 to monitor the 
implementation of the amended orchid annotation, and also adopt similar 
decisions to monitor the implementation of the amended Euphorbia 
annotation. In the Annex to Document CoP14 Doc. 31, Switzerland 
provides the draft renewals of Decisions 13.98 and 13.99, plus two new 
similar draft decisions on the Euphorbia annotation. The United States 
agrees that, if the species proposals amending the Euphorbia annotation 
and the orchid annotation are adopted at CoP14, then the Parties should 
also adopt decisions to monitor the implementation of these amended 
annotations, in order to determine how effective they are and whether 
they are causing any significant enforcement difficulties. It is also 
the U.S. position that, if these two proposals are not adopted, 
Decisions 13.98 and 13.99 should still be continued.
    32. Incentives for implementation of the Convention (Doc. 32). 
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Oppose. Document CoP14 Doc. 32 
reviews Decisions 13.76 and 13.77, and summarizes the issues involved 
in incentives for implementation of the convention. The Secretariat's 
lists numerous recommendations, including the creation of a working 
group to identify options for CITES Authorities in designing and using 
specific incentive measures.
    While the United States does not have any fundamental objections to 
the use of economic incentives to further wildlife conservation in the 
context of CITES, the text of the Convention is silent on this matter. 
Although careful and detailed consideration must be given by the 
Parties prior to incorporating these concepts and specific 
recommendations into the body of CITES soft law, we note that the 
Secretariat's report indicates that there was no response from Parties 
to the Notification calling for submissions on economic incentives 
(2005/022). We, therefore, have questions about the value of this work 
to the CITES Parties. The report presents interesting information to 
the Parties, but given the lack of interest, this work can be 
successfully brought to a close and this agenda topic retired. Specific 
work, such as the survey of fee structures is valuable in its own right 
as an implementation item, but other proposed decision elements 
directed to the Standing Committee, the Parties, and the Secretariat 
are not a priority and should not be supported.

Trade Control and Marking Issues

    33. Introduction from the sea (Doc. 33). Tentative U.S. negotiating 
position: Support. This document was prepared by the CITES Secretariat 
on behalf of the Standing Committee and reports on progress made since 
CoP13 on issues related to introduction from the sea. In 2005, a 
workshop on introduction from the sea was convened in accordance with 
Decision 13.18. The report of the workshop, the comments received on 
the report, and a draft resolution and draft decision prepared by the 
Secretariat were considered at SC54. It was agreed that a working group 
would work electronically to refine the definition of the ``marine 
environment not under the jurisdiction of any State'' based on issues 
raised at SC54 and comments on the workshop report.

[[Page 30613]]

Document CoP14 Doc. 33 includes a draft resolution that contains both 
the definition agreed by the workshop and an alternative definition put 
forward by the working group. The Standing Committee recommends that 
the CoP reach agreement on the bracketed text and adopt the resolution 
to provide a definition of the ``marine environment not under the 
jurisdiction of any State.'' The United States has been actively 
involved in discussions related to introduction from the sea since the 
drafting of the Treaty, and we strongly support continuing efforts to 
achieve common understanding of the practical application of the 
introduction from the sea provision under CITES. We participated in the 
2005 workshop and the electronic working group following SC54. We 
strongly support adoption of the draft resolution with the alternative 
definition put forward by the working group in place of the definition 
agreed at the 2005 workshop.
    Document CoP14 Doc. 33 also includes a draft decision directed to 
the Standing Committee. The decision calls for the establishment of a 
working group on introduction from the sea, to work primarily through 
electronic means, to consider further clarification of terms and other 
issues identified in the 2005 workshop report. The working group would 
be asked to report its findings to CoP15. The United States believes 
that, given the increasing number of listing proposals for marine 
species at recent CoPs, continued work on the practical implementation 
of the introduction from the sea provision is important, and we 
therefore support the formation of such a working group.
    34. Trade in Appendix-I species (Doc. 34). Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Based on the results of the United Nations 
Environment Programme World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) 
analysis reported at SC54, most trade in Appendix-I species reported by 
the Parties is conducted appropriately. However, UNEP-WCMC noted that 
further clarification of the purpose of transaction codes would be 
useful, and that countries also need to show greater care in applying 
source codes. The United States supports the need to clarify further 
the use of certain purpose of transaction and source codes so that 
there is more uniformity in how codes are used. As identified in 
Document CoP14 Doc. 38, the Animals Committee and Plants Committee were 
unable to make significant progress on production systems and source 
codes and have proposed a more narrow scope of work to develop a 
definition of ranching for application to CITES for CoP15. The United 
States submitted a document (CoP14 Doc. 39) proposing refinements to 
the purpose of transaction codes, to eliminate duplicities and ensure 
better usage by the Parties.
    35. International expert workshop on non-detriment findings (Doc. 
35; Mexico). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. The 
Scientific Authority of each Party is required to make non-detriment 
findings for species listed in Appendix I and Appendix II. However, 
many countries lack financial and technical resources and expertise to 
fully meet this obligation. The proposed workshop on making CITES non-
detriment findings will improve Parties abilities to make 
scientifically sound findings, build regional capacity, and foster 
greater cooperation among Parties to effectively implement the 
Convention.
    The proposed workshop is an initiative that grew out of discussions 
among the three Parties in the North American Region of CITES--Canada, 
Mexico, and the United States. The United States is fully supportive of 
this workshop. We believe that strengthening the capacities of CITES 
Scientific Authorities will help to ensure that trade in CITES-listed 
species does not occur at levels that threaten their survival.
    36. Management of annual export quotas (Doc. 36). Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Support, provided negotiated changes to the text 
of the draft resolution will advance and support the establishment, 
implementation, and monitoring of nationally established export quotas 
for Appendix-II species. The United States initiated discussion of this 
issue at CoP12 and has been an active participant in the Standing 
Committee's Export Quota Working Group (EQWG). This document accurately 
reflects the discussions of the EQWG since CoP13, which has made 
significant progress in developing a draft resolution and amendments to 
existing resolutions that would cover this issue. Although substantive 
issues remain unresolved, as reflected in Document CoP14 Doc. 36, the 
United States hopes that, with further discussion at CoP14, a final 
draft resolution can be agreed and adopted. The United States has 
participated in these deliberations with a goal of ensuring that export 
quotas for CITES-listed species provide a meaningful tool for 
monitoring and controlling trade by providing a feedback mechanism for 
importing countries to communicate irregularities and potential illegal 
trade to exporting countries.
    37. Appendix-I Species Subject to Export Quotas
    37.1 Leopard export quotas for Mozambique (Doc. 37.1; Mozambique). 
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Oppose. In this document, 
Mozambique proposes to increase its export quota for leopard hunting 
trophies and skins for personal use from 60 to 120. The United States, 
as reflected in the document we submitted for CoP12 on establishing 
scientifically based quotas, and in accordance with Resolution Conf. 
9.21 (Rev. CoP13), which calls for establishment of a scientific basis 
for proposed quotas, is very interested in ensuring that annual export 
quotas are established on strong biological data. Mozambique's request 
does not provide enough biological information about the population of 
leopards or their prey in Mozambique to determine whether the 
population can be sustained under the proposed quota figure.
    37.2 Black rhinoceros export quotas for Namibia and South Africa 
(Doc. 37.2; Kenya). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. 
Kenya is proposing to rescind Resolution Conf. 13.5, which allows 
Namibia and South Africa to export five black rhino sport-hunted 
trophies annually. Kenya has provided information about management 
problems in Namibia and increased levels of rhino poaching in South 
Africa since the exports were approved at CoP13 in 2004. However, this 
information is contradicted by a report on the status and trade of 
rhinos produced by the IUCN-SSC's African Rhino Specialist Group (CoP14 
Doc. 54), which reports an increase in the black rhino population in 
both countries and very limited rhino poaching in Namibia or South 
Africa. Although Kenya fails to provide information to show that the 
existing quota is biologically unsustainable or that range-wide 
poaching of black rhinos has increased as a result of the export of 
sport-hunted trophies, their document does raise questions that should 
be addressed by Namibia and South Africa prior to the United States 
finalizing its position on this document. It should be noted that this 
species is listed as endangered under the Endangered Species Act and 
that the import of a black rhinoceros sport-hunted trophy into the 
United States must meet additional regulatory requirements.
    38. Production systems for specimens of CITES-listed species (Doc. 
38). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. The United States 
has been an active participant in the discussion of production systems 
and source codes, by chairing an intersessional joint working group of 
the Animals and Plants Committees on the subject. We agree that 
additional discussions with a

[[Page 30614]]

narrower focus on ranching are warranted, as described in the document.
    40. Electronic Permitting
    40.1 Report of the Secretariat (Doc. 40.1). Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Oppose. The United States believes that the 
majority of Parties do not and will not have the technological or 
financial support to fully implement an electronic permitting system, 
now or in the near future. Given the complexity of this effort and the 
current state of technology, the United States believes that this does 
not represent a high-priority activity at this time, particularly given 
the current budget atmosphere.
    40.2 Report of the Standing Committee's Working Group (Doc. 40.2). 
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Oppose. See discussion on Document 
CoP14 Doc. 40.1 above.
    41. Transport of live specimens (Doc. 41). Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Support. In Document CoP14 Doc. 41 (Rev. 1), the 
Secretariat summarizes work done by the Transport Working Group and 
presents a revision of Resolution Conf. 10.21 on ``Transport of live 
animals'' to ``Transport of live specimens'' by including the transport 
of plants. Other changes would limit review of shipment mortality to 
only those shipments with high mortality.
    The United States is generally in favor of the revisions to 
Resolution Conf. 10.21, in particular the inclusion of plants, which 
will result in a more comprehensive resolution. While the United States 
continues to be interested in all mortality during shipment, we realize 
that this presents a burden on already-taxed inspectors and customs 
officials, and agree with the new language in the revision that calls 
for the Animals and Plants Committees to examine high-mortality 
shipments of live specimens.
    The United States is in favor of efforts to provide comprehensive 
information on the best methods for live animal and plant transport. 
The requirements in the International Air Transport Association (IATA) 
Live Animals Regulations (LAR), while used specifically for air 
transport, are in most cases appropriate for non-air transport (road, 
rail, and sea). The World Organisation for Animal Health (OIE)'s 
proposed Web site for non-air animal and plant transport methods would 
be useful as a supplement for alternative transport methods to those 
described in the IATA-LAR, provided it addresses the challenges 
presented with the transport of live captive and wild CITES-listed taxa 
that require special attention for non-air transport methods (e.g., 
duration of transit time, environmental conditions, and conveyance 
vehicles).
    42. Physical inspection of timber shipments (Doc. 42; Germany, on 
behalf of the European Community Member States). Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Support. Document CoP14 Doc. 42 details a number 
of problems faced by CITES inspection officials at ports of import and 
export in inspecting, identifying, and measuring the volume of CITES 
timber shipments. Document CoP14 Doc. 42 recommends that CITES take 
action to provide guidance to the Parties on enforcement of timber 
listings and focuses on identification and the development of a 
methodology for the physical inspection of timber shipments. The 
document contains two draft decisions in the Annex. The first draft 
decision would direct the Secretariat, in consultation with the Plants 
Committee, CITES Parties, and relevant organizations, to identify 
existing timber identification tools for CITES-listed species and 
identify ways that these tools can be accessed by CITES inspection 
authorities. This decision would further direct the Secretariat to 
identify gaps for which additional work is needed to develop timber 
identification tools; the Secretariat is then to report its findings to 
the Standing Committee. The second draft decision would direct the 
Standing Committee, in consultation with the Secretariat, range 
countries, and other Parties and relevant organizations, to develop 
guidelines for the enforcement of timber listings and to focus on the 
development of a methodology to carry out physical inspections of 
timber shipments.
    44. Identification Manual (Doc. 44). Tentative U.S. negotiating 
position: Support. This document is a report from the Secretariat on 
progress in the development of identification materials for listed 
species. We are nearing completion of an identification sheet for 
paddlefish (Polyodon spathula) and plan to submit the sheet to the 
CITES Secretariat later this year. On December 16, 2005, we listed the 
alligator snapping turtle (Macroclemys temminckii) and all species of 
map turtles (Graptemys spp.) in Appendix III of CITES. We are currently 
working with the University of Kansas to draft identification sheets 
for those species. We will continue to address the remaining CITES-
listed species for which the United States is responsible for providing 
identification materials.

Exemptions and Special Trade Provisions

    45. Personal and household effects (Doc. 45). Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Support. This document contains a proposal from 
the Standing Committee's Personal and Household Effects Working Group 
to amend Resolution Conf. 13.7 (on control of trade in personal and 
household effects) to facilitate trade in personally owned specimens of 
certain CITES-listed species. The United States has been an active 
participant in this working group since it was established in 2006. The 
United States believes that the list of exempted items is a useful tool 
in implementing the Convention. We also believe that, although 
additions to the list may be appropriate in certain limited 
circumstances, any substantial increase in the number of items included 
in the list is likely to create confusion and enforcement problems. The 
United States supports development of a careful and deliberative 
process to amend the list.
    46. Trade in some crocodilian specimens (Doc. 46; Germany, on 
behalf of the European Community Member States). Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Oppose. The basic contention of the document is 
that the implementation of Resolution Conf. 11.12 is working so well 
that the issuance of re-export documents for finished crocodilian 
leather products is an expensive, unnecessary redundancy. This proposal 
is inconsistent with CITES Article I(b)(ii), which requires that 
readily recognizable parts and derivatives of animal species listed in 
Appendices I and II are considered specimens that are subject to the 
provisions of the Convention. The proponents have not argued or 
presented information to suggest that these specimens are not readily 
recognizable. We are unconvinced that the issuance of re-export 
documents for finished crocodilian leather products is unnecessarily 
redundant. Furthermore, we believe that adoption of such a proposal 
would establish a dangerous precedent that some Parties may wish to 
apply to the finished products of other CITES-listed species.
    47. Applications to register operations that breed Appendix-I 
animal species in captivity for commercial purposes (Doc. 47). 
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Oppose. This document refers to 
Notification to the Parties Nos. 2004/054 and 2005/48, requests by the 
Management Authority of the Philippines to register a captive-breeding 
operation for the following birds: Amazona ochrocephala auropalliata, 
Amazona ochrocephala oratrix, Amazona viridigenalis, Anodorhynchus 
hyacinthinus, Ara militaris, Ara rubrogenys, Cacatua goffini, and 
Propyrrhura maracana. We

[[Page 30615]]

are unable to support the approval of this operation for these eight 
species because the applications did not provide sufficient 
documentation on legal acquisition of the parental stock. Although 
documentation was provided, it is not specific to the species involved 
and refers only generically to parrots. Further, no documentation is 
provided to show that the parental stock was legally exported from 
range countries. Therefore, the captive-breeding operation does not 
meet the bred-in-captivity criteria of Resolution Conf. 10.16 (Rev.), 
specifically paragraph (b)(ii)A, which requires that the breeding stock 
must have been established ``in accordance with CITES and relevant 
national laws.'' Approval of this operation in the absence of 
documentation of legal origin of its stock could potentially set a 
precedent for approving other captive-breeding operations that 
similarly lack such documentation.
    48. Relationship between ex situ production and in situ 
conservation: report of the Standing Committee (Doc. 48). Tentative 
U.S. negotiating position: Document CoP14 Doc. 48 contains 
recommendations of the Standing Committee's Clearing House. As a member 
of the Clearing House, the United States provided technical comments on 
the version of this document presented to the Standing Committee for 
SC54. The United States agrees with the CITES Secretariat that the 
issues raised by the relationship between ex situ production methods 
and in situ conservation efforts (for CITES-listed species) are 
interesting. However, we believe that the Parties must carefully 
consider, in light of current budgetary constraints, whether the 
recommended study represents a high-priority activity and will support 
the core purposes and functions of CITES.
    49. Reservations regarding species transferred from one Appendix to 
another (Doc. 49). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. The 
Convention provides three provisions under which a Party may take a 
reservation: (1) Article XXIII provides for a new Party to take a 
reservation with respect to a species listed in Appendix I, II, or III, 
within 90 days after the date that the Party deposits its instrument of 
ratification; (2) Article XV provides for a Party to take a reservation 
to an adopted amendment to Appendix I or II, within 90 days after the 
CoP at which the amendment was adopted; and (3) Article XVI provides 
for a Party to take a reservation on a species listed in Appendix III, 
or on any parts or derivatives of that species, at any time after the 
listing of the species. With Document CoP14 Doc. 49, the Secretariat 
presents a draft revision to Resolution Conf. 4.25 to clarify that, in 
cases where a Party holds a reservation in relation to a species that 
is subsequently transferred from one Appendix to another (or in other 
words deleted from one Appendix and simultaneously added to another 
Appendix), the reservation will be considered as no longer valid, and 
the Party will need to enter a new reservation if it wishes to maintain 
the reservation on the species. In the draft revision, the Secretariat 
also proposes to combine the two existing recommendations in Resolution 
Conf. 4.25 to shorten and simplify the text.

Species Trade and Conservation Issues

    50. Great apes (Doc. 50). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: 
Undecided until certain reports are made available to the CITES 
Secretariat and reviewed. In Document CoP14 Doc. 50 the CITES 
Secretariat reviews activities involving great apes.
    At SC54, held in October 2006, the Secretariat expressed its 
concern regarding a lack of information relating to orangutans that had 
been illegally imported into Cambodia and questioned whether the 
Convention was being adequately implemented. The Standing Committee 
called upon Cambodia to facilitate a mission by the Secretariat to 
assess implementation of the Convention, but to date the request has 
not been answered. The Secretariat will report on this subject at CoP14 
and also has expressed its concerns regarding illicit trade in great 
apes by Egypt. The Standing Committee requested Egypt to prepare a 
report for CoP14 on its enforcement of the Convention, particularly 
with regard to the illicit trade in primates. The report has not yet 
been prepared. The Standing Committee recommended that the Conference 
of the Parties review the reports concerning Cambodia and Egypt and 
decide whether additional measures, including non-compliance measures 
or a verification mission by the Secretariat, are necessary.
    The United States is unable to determine a definite position until 
the reports requested by the Secretariat from Cambodia and Egypt 
concerning reports on illegal trade in primates can be reviewed. The 
United States takes non-compliance issues very seriously and will look 
closely at the responses and reports requested from Cambodia and Egypt. 
The United States has been supportive of past actions recommended by 
the Secretariat in response to non-compliance issues, and unless there 
are circumstances that would warrant otherwise, we expect to continue 
our support of the Secretariat's recommendations.
    51. Cetaceans (Doc. 51; Japan). Tentative U.S. negotiating 
position: Oppose. This document contains two draft decisions that, if 
adopted, would direct the Animals Committee to include in its Review of 
the Appendices all cetaceans in Appendix I that are managed by the 
International Whaling Commission (IWC). The second draft decision would 
direct the CITES Secretariat to write to the IWC Secretariat conveying 
the concern of the Conference of the Parties regarding the postponement 
of the Revised Management Scheme discussions. The United States 
believes it is doubtful that any new and compelling information would 
be revealed by this review, since the whale species most highly traded 
have been carefully reviewed by the IWC Scientific Committee and have 
been under almost continuous scrutiny by the Parties since CoP9 in 
1994.
    52. Asian big cats (Doc. 52). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: 
Support. In Document CoP14 Doc. 52, the Secretariat notes that several 
countries have achieved success in halting the downward population 
trend for wild tigers by using well-equipped and trained anti-poaching 
units. However, the Secretariat contends that, despite all the 
attention and money that have been put towards conserving tigers, wild 
tiger populations are probably at greater risk of extinction today than 
ever before. Unless the CoP can identify any new approach to the 
conservation of Asian big cat species, the Secretariat sees little 
option other than for the Parties to renew their efforts to eliminate 
illicit trade in specimens of these species.
    53. Elephants
    53.1 Trade in elephant specimens (Doc. 53.1). Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Undecided, pending the outcome of the African 
elephant range States dialogue meeting and discussions at SC55. This 
document was submitted by the Secretariat to report on a number of 
items related to both domestic and international ivory trade. 
Specifically, the document provides information on accomplishments 
achieved under the Action Plan for the control of trade in African 
elephant ivory, adopted at CoP13; the Secretariat's efforts to verify 
if certain conditions have been met to allow international trade from 
government-owned ivory stocks for certain countries, in line with the 
annotation adopted at CoP12; a review of the implementation of ivory 
trade controls in Zimbabwe; and a number of recent items related to 
illegal

[[Page 30616]]

international trade in ivory. The Secretariat will report orally on 
this subject at CoP14 and make specific recommendations at that time. 
The United States will formulate its position based on the results of 
the African elephant range States dialogue meeting and reports expected 
at SC55 and CoP14.
    53.2 Monitoring of illegal trade in ivory and other elephant 
specimens (Doc. 53.2). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. 
At the time this notice was prepared, this document had not been posted 
on the Secretariat's website.
    53.3 Monitoring of illegal hunting in elephant range States (Doc. 
53.3). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. This document 
was prepared by the Secretariat to report on progress since CoP13 in 
implementing the MIKE (Monitoring the Illegal Killing of Elephants) 
program. At SC54, the Committee agreed that MIKE baseline information 
was not yet complete (a condition required before the ivory sale agreed 
at CoP12 may take place) and that the Secretariat should report on the 
MIKE baseline at SC55. The Secretariat notes in Document CoP14 Doc. 
53.3 that the completed baseline information is ready to be presented 
at SC55. The document discusses MIKE activities since CoP13 and 
describes the current status of funding for the African and Asian MIKE 
programs. Although funding has been secured to support the MIKE program 
in Africa through 2011, the Secretariat is seeking $4 million to 
support MIKE activities in Asia for the period 2007-2011. The 
Secretariat will report orally on this subject at CoP14, including 
information on the outcomes of the baseline discussions at SC54 and 
fund-raising efforts. The United States will formulate its position 
based on the results of the African elephant range States dialogue 
meeting and reports expected at SC55 and CoP14.
    53.4 Illegal ivory trade and control of internal markets (Doc. 
53.4; Kenya and Mali). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. 
This document submitted by Kenya and Mali is intended to support CoP14 
Prop. 6. Document CoP14 Doc. 53.4 chronicles ivory seizures since CoP13 
and provides information on domestic ivory markets around the world. 
Kenya and Mali propose amendments to Resolution Conf. 10.10 (Rev. 
CoP12), including a recommendation that Parties whose elephant 
populations are listed in Appendix I not introduce proposals to 
transfer those populations to Appendix II for a period of 20 years and 
a 20-year moratorium on ivory trade from Appendix-II populations, 
except for non-commercial trade in hunting trophies and the sale 
approved at CoP12. The document also includes a draft decision urging 
ivory-importing countries and others to provide financial and technical 
support for implementation of the Action Plan for the control of trade 
in African elephant ivory. We appreciate the position of Kenya and Mali 
relative to conservation efforts for African elephants. However, we 
note that a 20-year ban on listing proposals may be contrary to Article 
XV of the Treaty, which provides for any Party to propose an amendment 
to Appendix I or II at any CoP. The United States will formulate its 
final position based on the results of the African elephant range 
States dialogue meeting and reports expected at SC55 and CoP14.
    54. Rhinoceroses (Doc. 54). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: 
Support in principle, but financial decisions are still undecided. In 
Document CoP14 Doc. 54, the Secretariat reports on the outcome of the 
projects undertaken by IUCN and TRAFFIC related to the conservation of 
and trade in African and Asian rhinoceroses. The Secretariat proposes 
to incorporate the reporting role of the IUCN/SSC African and Asian 
Rhino Specialist Groups and TRAFFIC into Resolution Conf. 9.14 (Rev. 
CoP13). The Secretariat also proposes two draft decisions related to 
the continued illegal trade in rhinoceros horns and one draft decision 
related to site-based monitoring of rhinoceros populations. The 
Secretariat notes that there are substantial financial implications 
associated with adopting its recommendations on this issue. The United 
States applauds the work undertaken by IUCN and TRAFFIC and supports 
continued work in combating the illegal hunting and trade in 
rhinoceroses. However, with regard to the financial implications of 
adopting the recommendations in the document, we believe that any items 
related to budgeting and financing activities under CITES must be 
carefully considered by the Parties in light of other priorities.
    55. Tibetan antelope (Doc. 55). Tentative U.S. negotiating 
position: Support. Resolution Conf. 11.8 (Rev. CoP13) instructed the 
Standing Committee to undertake a regular review of the enforcement 
measures taken by the Parties to eliminate illicit trade in Tibetan 
antelope products on the basis of the CITES Secretariat's report, and 
to report the results at each meeting of the Conference of the Parties. 
This document submitted by Secretariat summarizes the report.
    56. Saiga antelope (Doc. 56). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: 
Support, with additions. This document refers to Decisions 13.27 
through 13.35 on saiga antelope, which were to be implemented prior to 
CoP14. These interconnected decisions were directed to the range States 
of the saiga antelope (Kazakhstan, Mongolia, the Russian Federation, 
Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, and possibly China), other Parties 
(specifically those that are important consumers of and traders in 
saiga products, and those that could act as financial donors) and 
bodies, the Standing Committee, and the CITES Secretariat to address 
serious concerns over the continuously deteriorating conservation 
status of the saiga antelope. This document reports on the progress in 
accomplishing these decisions over the past 3 years, and recommends 
additional draft decisions to the Parties to ensure the continued 
conservation of saiga antelope. The saiga antelope was listed in 
Appendix II in 1995. The most significant threat to the species is 
illegal hunting, primarily for the Asian traditional medicine trade. In 
the document, the Secretariat notes that anti-poaching efforts have 
intensified in some parts of the saiga's range, and should be extended 
to its entire range. We wish to underscore the significance of this 
statement, because poaching continues to impact conservation efforts to 
restore the saiga population, which decreased from one million to 
30,000 animals in the 1990s. According to the Secretariat's document, 
the Russian Federation is the only range country that has not signed 
the Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) for the Conservation, Restoration 
and Sustainable Use of the Saiga Antelope (Saiga tatarica tatarica). 
The MoU contains a Saiga Action Plan that calls for measures to restore 
the habitat and populations of the saiga antelope, and enhance 
transboundary and international cooperation through, inter alia, a 
regional conservation and management strategy. Therefore, the 
Secretariat recommends that the Russian Federation sign the MoU as soon 
as possible. The United States has provided financial support for the 
conservation and protection of the saiga antelope in the wild and for 
the range States workshop on this species in May 2002 in Kalmykia. We 
support the Secretariat's recommendations and plan to suggest the 
inclusion of saiga antelope on the agenda of the Standing Committee 
meetings between CoP14 and CoP15.
    57. Tortoises and freshwater turtles (Doc. 57). Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Undecided. The United States has been involved in 
developing CITES

[[Page 30617]]

listing proposals and policy advice on the trade in tortoises and 
turtles for a number of years. While we generally do not have an 
objection to the amendments suggested by the Secretariat--provided they 
are endorsed by consensus by the Asian range and trading States--we are 
concerned that the CITES Parties have not paid sufficient attention to 
these trade problems after listing a number of Asian turtle species in 
Appendix II at CoPs 12 and 13. Due to the continuing and evolving trade 
in these species in Asia, including farming practices that may 
negatively impact wild populations, the United States believes that 
additional study and discussion of these problems is needed, and we 
plan to introduce this point at CoP14.
    58. Hawksbill turtle (Doc. 58). Tentative U.S. negotiating 
position: Support. We agree with the Secretariat that no further action 
is needed. No funding was found for the convening of a workshop to 
develop a collaborative regional strategy for the conservation of 
hawksbill sea turtles, perhaps because it is regulation of 
international trade and not management that is the main responsibility 
of CITES. However, the Inter-American Convention for the Protection and 
Conservation of Sea Turtles, at its last meeting passed a resolution 
calling for a workshop to evaluate the current status of hawksbill sea 
turtle populations in the Wider Caribbean and Western Atlantic, and to 
present the best available methods of research and conservation for the 
species. The United States will announce its support for the IAC 
workshop and recommend that CITES collaborate with this and other 
relevant bodies concerning this species such as the Caribbean 
Environment Program.
    59. Sharks
    59.1 Report of the Animals Committee (Doc. 59.1). Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Support with exception. The report contains: (1) 
A review of implementation issues related to sharks listed in the CITES 
Appendices, to provide assistance to Parties in managing the species 
covered by the Convention; (2) information on specific cases where 
trade is having an adverse impact on sharks and the key species of 
sharks affected in this way; and (3) a listing and analysis of those 
species that are specifically threatened by trade. The proposal 
contains a large number of wide-ranging decisions and recommendations. 
As indicated by the Secretariat, at CoP14 a working group will review 
and edit the draft decisions; prioritize and rationalize the proposed 
measures; minimize overlapping instructions; look into reducing and 
simplifying the reporting burden; and assess the cost of implementing 
the draft decisions. The United States will work to ensure that this 
work is completed.
    59.2 Additional conservation measures (Doc. 59.2; Australia). 
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. This document states 
that, while the report from the Animals Committee to this meeting of 
the Conference of the Parties contains a number of useful suggestions 
for consideration to protect and conserve sharks, additional measures 
should be considered under the agenda item addressing sharks. These 
measures include: (1) That countries with National Plans of Action 
(NPOA-Sharks) strongly encourage the remaining shark-fishing countries 
to develop and implement NPOA-Sharks; (2) that regional fishing 
management organizations implement regional plans of action; and (3) 
that Parties greatly improve their data collection and reporting. The 
United States is one of the 16 countries that have implemented a NPOA-
Sharks and is a lead country for promoting the sustainable use of shark 
resources.
    59.3 Trade measures regarding the porbeagle Lamna nasus and the 
spiny dogfish Squalus acanthias (Doc. 59.3; Germany, on behalf of the 
European Community Member States). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: 
Undecided. This document will be considered if proposals for listing 
porbeagle and spiny dogfish in Appendix II are adopted. The document 
contains a draft decision that, if adopted, would direct the Animals 
Committee, in consultation with the FAO and other relevant experts, to 
examine trade in porbeagles and spiny dogfish and report at the 16th 
meeting of the Conference of the Parties. The Secretariat believes 
Resolution Conf. 12.6 on Conservation and Management of Sharks already 
directs the Animals Committee to make species-specific recommendations 
to the Conference of the Parties, if necessary, on improving the 
conservation status of sharks and the regulation of international trade 
in these species. FAO has been present at each of the recent meetings 
of the Animals Committee and has assisted the Committee in discussions 
on marine fish species, including sharks.
    60. Sturgeons and Paddlefish
    60.1 Report of the Secretariat (Doc. 60.1). Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: No position is necessary; the CoP is asked to 
note the report. This document was prepared by the Secretariat to 
report on progress made in developing a trade database for sturgeon 
specimens subject to annual quotas (Decisions 13.44-13.47) and other 
activities related to sturgeon conservation.
    60.2 Amendment of Resolution Conf. 12.7 (Rev. CoP13)
    60.2.1 Proposal of the Standing Committee's Working Group on 
Sturgeons (Doc. 60.2.1; Islamic Republic of Iran). Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Support some provisions; oppose others. Two 
documents (CoP14 Doc. 60.2.1 and CoP14 Doc. 60.2.2) contain proposed 
amendments to the resolution on conservation and trade of sturgeons and 
paddlefish (Resolution Conf. 12.7 (Rev. CoP13)) and should be 
considered together. Document CoP14 Doc. 60.2.1 was submitted by the 
Islamic Republic of Iran, on behalf of the Standing Committee's working 
group on sturgeons, and Document CoP14 Doc. 60.2.2 was submitted by the 
Russian Federation. We fully support some of the changes proposed, 
including a reduction of the personal effects exemption for caviar from 
250g to 125g, but we have serious concerns about others, including the 
proposed extension of the timeframe established at CoP13 for export of 
caviar from shared stocks. The United States has participated in past 
working groups on this issue, including the group established at SC54. 
Document CoP14 Doc. 60.2.1 includes text that was not agreed to by the 
working group and will require further discussion at the CoP. We expect 
that a working group will be established at CoP14, and we plan to 
continue to participate fully on this important issue. We will develop 
a final position based on the outcome of discussions at CoP14.
    60.2.2 Proposal of the Russian Federation (Doc. 60.2.2). Tentative 
U.S. negotiating position: See discussion on Document CoP14 Doc. 60.2.1 
above.
    61. Toothfish: report of CCAMLR (Doc. 61). Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Support. At CoP12, the Parties adopted Resolution 
Conf. 12.4, Cooperation between CITES and the Commission for the 
Conservation of Antarctic Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR) regarding 
trade in toothfish, that encouraged CCAMLR to ``maintain a permanent 
flow of information'' to CITES through the Conference of the Parties. 
Document CoP14 Doc. 61 is CCAMLR's report to the CoP and contains four 
recommendations for the Conference of the Parties to: (1) request four 
particular CITES Parties that are either involved in illegal, 
unregulated, and unreported (IUU) fishing for toothfish or engaged in 
toothfish trade without having fully implemented CCAMLR conservation 
measures to report their position regarding

[[Page 30618]]

implementing Resolution Conf. 12.4 for consideration at the next CCAMLR 
annual meeting; (2) notify CITES Parties whose fishing vessels are 
engaged in IUU fishing for toothfish that their actions seriously 
undermine the objectives of CCAMLR; and (3) reinforce the provision of 
Resolution Conf. 12.4 that recommends that CITES Parties that capture 
or trade in toothfish adhere to CCAMLR if they have not already done so 
and, in any case, cooperate voluntarily with its conservation measures, 
particularly the catch documentation scheme (CDS).
    The United States recognizes the threat that IUU fishing poses to 
toothfish populations and fully supports adoption of CCAMLR 
conservation measures by all countries involved in the toothfish trade. 
We renew our full endorsement and strong support of the fundamental 
principles and language adopted in Resolution Conf. 12.4 in 2002.
    62. Sea cucumbers (Doc. 62). Tentative U.S. negotiating position: 
Support. This document fulfills the decision of the last CoP, that the 
Animals Committee should prepare, for consideration at the 14th meeting 
of the Conference of the Parties, a discussion paper on the biological 
and trade status of sea cucumbers to provide scientific guidance on the 
actions needed to secure their conservation status. The United States 
has actively participated in this process and will continue to do so.
    63. Trade in traditional medicines (Doc. 63; Australia). Tentative 
U.S. negotiating position: Support. In its document, Australia 
recommends a number of revisions to Resolution Conf. 10.19 (Rev. CoP12) 
(Traditional medicines), primarily aimed at encouraging Parties to 
pursue the development and use of alternative ingredients in 
traditional medicines as a preferred alternative to breeding Appendix-I 
species in captivity for commercial purposes. The United States shares 
Australia's concerns regarding the potential for creating or increasing 
demand for wild Appendix-I species by using captive-bred specimens in 
traditional medicines.
    64. Bigleaf mahogany: Report of the Working Group (Doc. 64). 
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. In Document CoP14 Doc. 
64, prepared by the Chairman of the Plants Committee with the 
assistance of the Chairman of the Bigleaf Mahogany Working Group 
(BMWG), the Plants Committee recommends adoption of a number of new 
draft decisions related to the continuation of the BMWG under the 
Plants Committee and the interpretation of the annotations for tree 
species listed in the Appendices. Additionally, the Plants Committee 
recommends a draft decision directed to the Plants Committee that it 
review at its 17th meeting (anticipated to be held in April 2008) range 
State reports on implementation of the CITES listing for bigleaf 
mahogany and consider whether there is a need to include the species in 
the Review of Significant Trade. The United States supports the 
continuation of the BMWG under the Plants Committee, but believes that, 
if by the 17th meeting of the Plants Committee (PC17), sufficient 
progress has not been made in improving the regulation of trade, the 
species should be included in the Review of Significant Trade as a 
matter of urgency.
    65. Report of the Central Africa Bushmeat Working Group (Doc. 65). 
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. Document CoP14 Doc. 65 
presents the Coordinator's report of the Central Africa Bushmeat 
Working Group in fulfillment of Decision 13.102 on progress in 
implementing national action plans relating to the trade in bushmeat 
and other initiatives regarding this issue. The United States has 
supported the work of the Working Group since its inception and 
applauds the progress the group has made in supporting the development 
of national strategies and action plans to combat international 
commercial bushmeat trade.

Amendment of the Appendices

    66. Periodic review of the Appendices (Doc. 66). Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Support. The Review of the Appendices is an 
activity conducted by the Animals and Plants Committees to ensure that 
the CITES Appendices continue to accurately reflect the biological and 
trade status of species included in the Appendices. This document 
recounts efforts by the Animals and Plants Committees, with the 
involvement of the Standing Committee, to establish an objective and 
efficient process for selecting species for review. Although the two 
technical committees, through a working group, developed a ``rapid 
assessment'' technique for selecting species for review, this procedure 
was subsequently determined to not be practicable for selecting a 
workable list of species for review. The Animals and Plants Committees 
have suggested that further work is needed to develop a process for 
selecting species for review, and are proposing that the work done thus 
far should be used as a starting point for further refining and 
finalizing these efforts.
    68. Proposals to Amend Appendices I and II (Doc. 68)
    Prop. 1. Transfer of Nycticebus spp. from Appendix II to Appendix 
I. Proposed by Cambodia. Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. 
Slow lorises (Nycticebus spp.) are prosimians, an ancient group of 
primates. The genus is widely distributed in at least 14 South and 
Southeast Asian countries. Large-scale deforestation has reduced the 
habitat for Nycticebus species, and thus it can be inferred that the 
genus has undergone a reduction in overall population numbers. In 
September 2006, the IUCN/SSC Primate Specialist Group revised its 
classification of Nycticebus species based on the IUCN Red List 
criteria and recommended that all species now be considered Vulnerable 
or Endangered. Recent scientific studies have also revealed that the 
genus Nycticebus contains more species than previously thought, and 
consequently, the individual species may consist of smaller 
populations. All species of Nycticebus have a low reproductive rate, 
making them particularly vulnerable to exploitation. Therefore, it 
seems that the biological criteria are met for listing in Appendix I 
according to Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP13). The proposal also 
demonstrates that international trade in species of Nycticebus has 
been, and still is taking place, primarily for medicinal purposes and 
for use as pets. Although official figures for legal trade are 
relatively low, much of the trade is illegal, as evidenced by the 
number of seizures taking place, indicating that the real trade volume 
is likely to be much higher.
    Prop. 3. Transfer the Ugandan population of leopard (Panthera 
pardus) from Appendix I to Appendix II with an annotation that trade is 
to be allowed for the exclusive purpose of sport hunting for trophies 
and skins for personal use, to be exported as personal effects; and 
with an annual export quota of 50 leopards for the whole country. 
Proposed by Uganda. Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Oppose 
transfer to Appendix II; oppose the proposed export quota of 50 
leopards per year. The proposal cites both Resolution Conf. 10.14 (Rev. 
CoP13) and Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP13) for the approval of an 
annual export quota of 50 leopards. The proposal is not written in 
accordance with the format for proposals to amend the Appendices as per 
Annex 6 to Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP13). As a result, it does not 
demonstrate that the population in Uganda no longer meets the 
biological criteria for inclusion in Appendix I or which precautionary 
measure will be in

[[Page 30619]]

place. The CITES Secretariat has suggested that Uganda request 
consideration of this proposal under agenda item 37 (Appendix-I species 
subject to export quotas) rather than item 68 (Proposals to amend the 
Appendices).
    Uganda asserts that the proposed export quota of 50 leopards per 
year is a precautionary figure that will account for both animal 
control and sport hunting. The United States, as reflected in the 
document we submitted for CoP12 on establishing scientifically based 
quotas and in accordance with Resolution Conf. 9.21 (Rev. CoP13), which 
calls for establishment of a scientific basis for proposed quotas, is 
keen to ensure that annual export quotas are established on strong 
biological data. Although a quota of 50 is considered by Uganda as 
precautionary, the proposal does not provide any supporting biological 
information for this figure. Therefore, it cannot be determined whether 
the population can be sustained under the proposed quota figure.
    Prop. 4. Maintenance of the African elephant (Loxodonta africana) 
populations of Botswana, Namibia, South Africa, and Zimbabwe in 
Appendix II in terms of Article II, paragraph 2(b), with the 
replacement of all existing annotations with annotations on trade, 
export quotas, and proceeds regarding raw ivory. Proposed by Botswana 
and Namibia. Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. The 
proposal would maintain the populations of Botswana, Namibia, South 
Africa, and Zimbabwe in Appendix II with changes to the annotations. 
The annotations would be replaced to allow the establishment of annual 
export quotas for trade in raw ivory. The ivory would be sold to 
trading partners that have been certified by the Secretariat, in 
consultation with the Standing Committee, and the income from the trade 
in raw ivory would be used exclusively for elephant conservation and 
community development programs. The United States will formulate its 
position based on the results of the African elephant range states 
dialogue meeting and reports expected at SC55 and CoP14.
    Prop. 5. Amendment of the annotation of the African elephant 
(Loxodonta africana) populations of Botswana. Proposed by Botswana. 
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. This proposal would 
amend the annotation for Botswana's elephant population from the live 
animal trade condition ``for in situ conservation programs'' only to 
``for commercial purposes.'' ``Trade in leather goods'' would be 
changed from ``non-commercial'' to ``commercial'' purposes (as is the 
case for Namibia and South Africa). Trade in registered raw ivory could 
only come from registered government-owned stocks originating in 
Botswana and subject to the conditions of Resolution Conf. 10.10 (Rev. 
CoP12) concerning domestic manufacturing and trade. A maximum of 40 
metric tons of ivory could be traded and exported in a single shipment 
under strict supervision of the Secretariat. The income of the trade 
would be used exclusively for elephant conservation and community 
conservation and development programs within or adjacent to the 
elephant range. The proposed annotation would allow an immediate ``one-
off'' sale and annual sales of up to 8 metric tons of registered stocks 
of raw ivory for commercial purposes. The United States will formulate 
its position based on the results of the African elephant range states 
dialogue meeting and reports expected at SC55 and CoP14.
    Prop. 6. Amendment of the annotation of the African elephant 
(Loxodonta africana) populations of Botswana, Namibia, and South 
Africa. Proposed by Kenya and Mali. Tentative U.S. negotiating 
position: Undecided. This proposal would amend the annotations of the 
populations of Botswana, Namibia, and South Africa to prohibit trade in 
raw or worked ivory for 20 years, except for hunting trophies for non-
commercial purposes, the one-off sale agreed upon at CoP12, and 
Namibian ekipas (ivory trinkets) for non-commercial purposes. It also 
revokes Zimbabwe's annotation to sell ivory carvings for non-commercial 
purposes. The United States will formulate its position based on the 
results of the African Elephant Range State Dialogue meeting and 
reports expected at SC55 and CoP14.
    Prop. 8. Amendment of the annotation of the vicu[ntilde]a (Vicugna 
vicugna) population of Bolivia for the exclusive purpose of allowing 
international trade in wool sheared from live vicu[ntilde]as, and in 
cloth and items made thereof, including luxury handicrafts and knitted 
articles. Proposed by Bolivia. Tentative U.S. negotiating position: 
Undecided. In February 2003, Bolivia listed its vicu[ntilde]a 
population in Appendix II for wool and products derived from sheared 
live animals of the populations of the Conservation Units of Mauri-
Desaguadero, Ulla Ulla, and L[iacute]pez-Chichas; and wool products 
made from sheared live animals of the rest of the population of 
Bolivia. This proposal would amend the annotation to include the entire 
Bolivian vicuna population for wool and products. The rest of the 
annotation remains unchanged. Although the wild population is 
increasing, we would like an explanation for the decrease in the 
population of L[iacute]pez-Chichas of over 2,000 specimens between 2002 
and 2004.
    Prop. 9. Inclusion of Barbary red deer (Cervus elaphus barbarus) in 
Appendix I. Proposed by Algeria. Tentative U.S. negotiating position: 
Oppose. The Barbary red deer is considered a subspecies of red deer 
(Cervus elaphus) and is confined to Tunisia, Algeria, and a 
reintroduced population in Morocco. However, recent genetic analysis 
has indicated that these populations in North Africa are virtually 
indistinguishable from C. elaphus corsicanus in Sardinia, Italy, and 
the reintroduced population in Corsica, France. One assessment 
considers all these populations to belong to a separate species, Cervus 
corsicanus. The Barbary red deer has been included in Appendix III at 
the request of Tunisia since 1976. The subspecies was assessed as 
``Lower risk/near threatened'' by IUCN in 1996. The wild population is 
reported to have decreased historically, and appears to have a 
restricted area of distribution. However, it is unclear if the 
biological criteria are met due to the uncertainty of its taxonomy. 
According to the proposal, there is no national utilization, no legal 
or illegal trade, and no actual or potential trade impacts. Therefore, 
the trade criteria for an Appendix-I listing are not met. Threats are 
reported to include poaching and forest fires; listing in Appendix I is 
not likely to benefit the conservation of this species.
    Prop. 10. Inclusion of Cuvier's gazelle (Gazella cuvieri) in 
Appendix I. Proposed by Algeria. Tentative U.S. negotiating position: 
Oppose. The Cuvier's gazelle is distributed in Algeria, Morocco, and 
Tunisia in small scattered populations. The species has been included 
in Appendix III at the request of Tunisia since 1976. The species was 
assessed by IUCN as ``Endangered'' in 1996, on the basis that the 
population numbered below 2,500 mature individuals and was declining. 
In 2005-2006, the Algerian population was estimated at 500 individuals, 
and populations were reported to be stable. According to the proposal, 
there is no national utilization, no legal or illegal trade, and no 
actual or potential trade impacts. Therefore, the trade criteria for an 
Appendix-I listing are not met. Threats are reported to include 
poaching and forest fires; listing in Appendix I is not likely to 
benefit the conservation of this species.

[[Page 30620]]

    Prop. 11. Inclusion of Dorcas gazelle (Gazella dorcas) in Appendix 
I. Proposed by Algeria. Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Oppose. 
The Dorcas gazelle has a patchy distribution in at least 19 countries 
in the arid and sub-arid zones of the Sahelo-Saharan region and in the 
Near East. The species has been included in Appendix III of CITES at 
the request of Tunisia since 1976. According to the proposal, the 
species' population in the wild has declined significantly, perhaps by 
50% within the past half-century, due to hunting with motorized 
vehicles and, to a lesser extent, degradation and disappearance of 
habitat. The species was assessed as ``Vulnerable'' by IUCN in 2000, 
and is included in Appendix I of the Convention on Migratory Species 
(CMS). The species does not appear to meet the biological criteria for 
inclusion in Appendix I, because there is no indication that the 
species' range is restricted in extent or that the overall population 
is small. The proposal does not provide any information on trade, and 
although the CITES trade database shows very low levels of 
international trade, it is mainly in live specimens, and to a lesser 
extent body parts and trophies. Therefore, the trade criteria for an 
Appendix-I listing are not met. Threats are reported to include 
poaching and overgrazing by cattle. Listing in Appendix I is not likely 
to benefit the conservation of this species.
    Prop. 12. Inclusion of slender-horned gazelle (Gazella leptoceros) 
in Appendix I. Proposed by Algeria. Tentative U.S. negotiating 
position: Support. The slender-horned gazelle is distributed across 
eight or nine countries in northern Africa. The species has been 
included in Appendix III of CITES at the request of Tunisia since 1976. 
The species was assessed as ``Endangered'' by IUCN in 1996 and appears 
to meet the biological criteria for an Appendix-I listing. According to 
the proposal, threats to the species include motorized hunting and 
degradation of vegetation. International trade in trophies does occur, 
but is not well documented. From a precautionary standpoint this 
species merits inclusion in Appendix I.
    Prop. 13. Transfer of the Brazilian population of black caiman 
(Melanosuchus niger) from Appendix I to Appendix II. Proposed by 
Brazil. Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. Brazil 
submitted this proposal to transfer its population from Appendix I to 
Appendix II. The population in Brazil comprises approximately 80% of 
the species' range, is estimated to comprise 16 million individuals, 
and is increasing. Brazil proposes to harvest 695 specimens per year in 
the Mamirau? Sustainable Development Reserve. In subsequent years, a 
harvest quota of 5-7% of the non-hatchling wild population (primarily 
juvenile males) would be in place throughout Brazil. We have some 
concerns about the adequacy of safeguards against illegal harvest, 
uncontrolled exports from Brazil, and possible effects on the species 
in adjacent range countries. We would also like to hear the opinions of 
the other range States (Bolivia, Colombia, Ecuador, Guyana, Peru, and 
Suriname). We note that this species is currently listed as endangered 
under the Endangered Species Act, and as such, even if the proposal is 
adopted, the import of specimens into the United States for commercial 
purposes would remain prohibited.
    Prop. 14. Transfer Guatemalan beaded lizard (Heloderma horridum 
charlesbogerti) from Appendix II to Appendix I. Proposed by Guatemala. 
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support. The Guatemalan beaded 
lizard is one of four subspecies of beaded lizard, a large venomous 
species native to Mexico and Guatemala. The Guatemalan beaded lizard is 
endemic to the Motagua Valley in eastern Guatemala and is considered to 
be one of the most endangered animals in the world. This subspecies was 
formally described in 1988, a decade later thought to be extinct in the 
wild, and then re-discovered in 2002. There are an estimated 170-250 
individuals of this subspecies; it is believed to have declined based 
on the difficulty of locating individuals compared to the 1980s. The 
major threats to the Guatemalan beaded lizard are habitat destruction, 
over-collection for local and foreign use, persecution by locals, and 
effects of hurricanes. Collection and trade in this subspecies are 
illegal in Guatemala. However, illegal domestic and international trade 
occur due to the high demand for the subspecies by collectors. Even a 
small level of trade in this subspecies is significant due to its 
extremely low population numbers.
    Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP13) states that split-listing a 
species should generally be avoided due to the potential enforcement 
problems it creates, and it states that taxonomic listings below the 
species level should be avoided unless the taxon in question is highly 
distinctive and the use of the name would not give rise to enforcement 
problems. Consultations with experts have revealed that specimens of 
this subspecies from one year of age to adulthood can be distinguished 
from other subspecies. Potential identification difficulties of very 
young animals should not be an issue of concern because only adult 
specimens have been found in the wild. This subspecies meets the 
biological and trade criteria for an Appendix-I listing, and prevention 
of any level of trade in wild specimens of this critically endangered 
subspecies would contribute significantly to its conservation.
    Prop. 15. Inclusion of porbeagle (Lamna nasus) in Appendix II with 
entry into effect of the inclusion to be delayed by 18 months to enable 
Parties to resolve the related technical and administrative issues. 
Proposed by Germany, on behalf of the European Community Member States. 
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. The proponent has cited 
that the species' life history, vulnerability to overexploitation, 
inadequate fisheries management, and overfishing as supporting reasons 
for the proposal. There is not sufficient data in the proposal to 
support the statement that international trade is one of the driving 
factors in this species' overfished status or a factor that could 
prohibit populations from rebounding. Both the United States and Canada 
are actively managing the species to reduce fishing pressure. It is 
also not clear whether it is possible (efficient and enforceable) to 
distinguish porbeagle sharks from other species of sharks in trade. The 
Fish and Wildlife Service (Service) and the National Marine Fisheries 
Service (NMFS) are studying the proposal and consulting with other 
Parties to develop the U.S. position.
    Prop. 16. Inclusion of spiny dogfish (Squalus acanthias) in 
Appendix II with entry into effect of the inclusion to be delayed by 18 
months to enable Parties to resolve the related technical and 
administrative issues. Proposed by Germany, on behalf of the European 
Community Member States. Tentative U.S. negotiating position: 
Undecided. The proponent has cited that the species' life history, 
vulnerability to overexploitation, inadequate fisheries management, and 
overfishing as supporting reasons for the proposal. The proposal calls 
for the listing of the species throughout its range. The Northeast 
Atlantic stock has suffered a large decline, but a number of other 
global stocks are currently stable. There are currently both Federal 
and interstate fishery management plans for spiny dogfish in the United 
States. The proponent also indicates that population declines in 
several Northern Hemisphere stocks, combined with high market demand, 
are driving fishing pressure on other stocks that are now beginning to 
supply international

[[Page 30621]]

markets. The proposal contains little information to support this 
observation. The Service and NMFS are studying the proposal and 
consulting with other Parties to develop the U.S. position.
    Prop. 18. Inclusion of European eel (Anguilla anguilla) in Appendix 
II. Proposed by Germany, on behalf of the European Community Member 
States. Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. The European 
eel occurs in coastal areas and freshwater ecosystems in Europe, 
northern Africa, and the Mediterranean parts of Asia. The proponent has 
cited that the species' complex life history in combination with heavy 
exploitation in all of its life stages and high fishing mortality, 
along with habitat loss, pollution, climate change affecting ocean 
currents, and damming of rivers, as factors that have resulted in sharp 
population declines. Poaching and illegal trade in European eels is 
also a concern. However, because the fishery is small in scale and 
specialized, bycatch of the species is not considered a threat to the 
species. Although there are various regional management measures in 
place, there is no regulatory protection mechanism in place to regulate 
international trade in the European eel. Due to historical and recent 
declines, as measured from harvest data (e.g., an average 95-99% 
decline in harvest in 19 rivers in 12 countries), the species appears 
to meet the criteria in Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP13) for 
inclusion in Appendix II. However, the similarity of appearance between 
this species and other eels in the genus Anguilla, including the 
American eel (A. rostrata), which is also in international trade, 
presents implementation and enforcement difficulties for such a 
listing.
    Prop. 20. Inclusion of Brazilian populations of spiny lobster 
(Panulirus argus and P. laevicauda) in Appendix II. Proposed by Brazil. 
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Oppose. The proponent states that 
the status of these species in Brazilian waters is severely overfished 
and that overfishing is still occurring mainly due to take of 
undersized animals. The United States feels strongly that, as the 
world's largest importer of Brazil's spiny lobsters, we should make 
every effort to support Brazil for its efforts to conserve and manage 
spiny lobster in their waters. However, this proposal is not 
supportable because it would result in a split-listing of the species 
that would not be enforceable. Enforcement authorities in importing 
countries would not be able to determine whether spiny lobsters 
entering their countries were coming from Brazil, and thus required to 
be accompanied by CITES export permits, or whether they had originated 
elsewhere. Inclusion of these species in Appendix III throughout their 
ranges would provide greater conservation benefit and would track the 
species throughout the Wider Caribbean. The Service and NMFS are 
consulting bilaterally with the Government of Brazil and multilaterally 
with other governments in the region to consider additional tools for 
the conservation of spiny lobster populations.
    Prop. 24. Deletion of leaf-bearing cacti in the genera Pereskia and 
Quiabentia from Appendix II. Proposed by Argentina. Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Undecided. This proposal would remove all species 
of these leaf-bearing cacti from Appendix II. For some of these 
species, whose status in the wild is unclear, we are concerned about 
the impact that unregulated trade may have on these species.
    Prop. 25. Deletion of leaf-bearing cacti in the genus Pereskiopsis 
from Appendix II. Proposed by Mexico. Tentative U.S. negotiating 
position: Support. This proposal would remove Pereskiopsis spp. from 
Appendix II. We have evaluated this proposal and discussed it directly 
with the Mexican CITES authorities, and have determined that the 
removal of this genus from Appendix II should not result in the 
unsustainable use of these species for trade or enforcement 
difficulties for regulating trade in other species due to similarity of 
appearance.
    Prop. 26. Merging and amendment of annotations 1, 
4 and 8 for cacti (Cactaceae spp. (4)) and 
orchids (Orchidaceae spp. (8)) in Appendix II, and all taxa 
annotated with annotation 1. Proposed by Switzerland. 
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Oppose. This proposal was produced 
outside the process that was established by the Plants Committee, at 
the direction of the Parties, to streamline the annotations for CITES-
listed medicinal plants. The proposed language broadens the exemptions 
as well as the taxa exempted, while providing little information on the 
impact of unregulated trade on the species. In particular, we note that 
inclusion of provisions to exempt leaves did not receive support from 
the Plants Committee when discussed at its 15th meeting (PC15), and the 
proposed provision to exempt herbarium specimens has been previously 
rejected by the Parties as not being consistent with the terms of the 
Convention.
    Prop. 27. Amendment of the annotations to Adonis vernalis, Guaiacum 
species, Hydrastis canadensis, Nardostachys grandiflora, Panax ginseng, 
Panax quinquefolius, Picrorhiza kurrooa, Podophyllum hexandrum, 
Pterocarpus santalinus, Rauvolfia serpentina, Taxus chinensis, T. 
fuana, T. cuspidata, T. sumatrana, and T. wallichiana, Orchidaceae 
species in Appendix II, and all Appendix-II and -III taxa annotated 
with annotation 1. Proposed by Switzerland as the Depositary 
Government, at the request of the Plants Committee. Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Support. This document was produced by consensus 
of the Medicinal Plant Annotations Working Group (MPAWG) in 
consultation with the Plants Committee, under the direction of the 
Conference of the Parties, to assess the effectiveness of and 
streamline the annotations for CITES-listed medicinal plants (CoP13: 
Decisions 13.50-13.52). The proposal clarifies terms and tracks 
currently exempted material believed to be in trade, without expanding 
upon the exemptions for species.
    Prop. 29. Amendment of the annotation to Euphorbia species. 
Proposed by Switzerland. Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Oppose. 
As currently written, the annotation is difficult to understand and may 
provide the opportunity to exclude wild-collected specimens from CITES 
controls.
    Prop. 30. Inclusion of pernambuco (Caesalpinia echinata) in 
Appendix II, including all parts and derivatives. Proposed by Brazil. 
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Support on the condition that the 
proposal will be amended at the CoP to exempt a limited quantity of 
manufactured musical bows for personal use (e.g., by professional 
musicians), or something similar. Pernambuco is the primary wood used 
to make fine bows for stringed musical instruments, for which there is 
no other comparable wood substitute.
    Pernambuco is a slow-growing tropical tree restricted to the 
Atlantic Coastal Forest of Brazil. Since 1992, the species has been 
listed as threatened in Brazil, and is categorized as endangered by the 
IUCN. Although Brazil has strict national controls in place that 
regulate the use of this species, the species and its Atlantic Forest 
habitat remain poorly protected, and enforcement of environmental laws 
is constrained by the availability of financial and human resources. 
Conservationists, and bow makers and musicians worldwide are concerned 
about the conservation and sustainable use of existing stocks of 
pernambuco. Several entities (e.g., the International Pernambuco 
Conservation Initiative) are actively working in Brazil

[[Page 30622]]

to promote conservation and reforestation of pernambuco.
    The listing of pernambuco in Appendix II would support the efforts 
undertaken by the Brazilian Government to ensure that trade is both 
legal and sustainable by requiring specimens in trade to have CITES 
permits. However, given the number of existing bows worldwide, a 
listing of the species that includes all parts and derivatives may be 
overly burdensome on traveling musicians without providing substantial 
conservation benefit. We will work with Brazil and other Parties on 
this proposal to promote the conservation of this species while 
avoiding unnecessary constraints on products already in trade.
    Prop. 31. Inclusion of rosewood or cocobola (Dalbergia retusa) in 
Appendix II, and D. granadillo for look-alike reasons. Proposed by 
Germany, on behalf of the European Community Member States. Tentative 
U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. Dalbergia retusa is a slow-
growing tree of tropical dry forests from Mexico to Panama; D. 
granadillo occurs in El Salvador and Mexico. Dalbergia retusa has been 
extensively harvested, and some areas are reported to be commercially 
exhausted. The United States imports rosewood, which is used primarily 
for the production of musical instruments. We are evaluating this 
proposal to determine if it meets the requirements for inclusion in 
Appendix II. The positions of range countries on this proposal are 
critical to the development of our position, and therefore, we are 
currently consulting with them on this proposal to determine how we can 
best work cooperatively for the conservation and sustainable use of 
this species.
    Prop. 32. Inclusion of Honduras rosewood (Dalbergia stevensonii) in 
Appendix II. Proposed by Germany, on behalf of the European Community 
Member States. Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. Honduran 
rosewood is restricted to swamp forests of southern Belize, northern 
Guatemala, and southeastern Mexico. The United States imports rosewood, 
which is used primarily for the production of musical instruments. We 
are evaluating this proposal to determine if it meets the requirements 
for inclusion in Appendix II. The positions of range countries on this 
proposal are critical to the development of our position, and 
therefore, we are currently consulting with them on this proposal to 
determine how we can best work cooperatively for the conservation and 
sustainable use of this species.
    Prop. 33. Inclusion of the genus Cedrela in Appendix II. Proposed 
by Germany, on behalf of the European Community Member States. 
Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Undecided. The proposal would 
include Spanish cedar (C. odorata), and all other species in the genus 
Cedrela (an estimated six species) for look-alike reasons, in Appendix 
II. Spanish cedar is a wide-ranging species of lowland forests in the 
Caribbean Islands, Central America, Mexico, and South America. In 2001, 
Colombia and Peru included their populations of Spanish cedar in 
Appendix III, with annotation 5, which designates logs, sawn 
wood and veneer sheets. Since this listing, exports of Spanish cedar 
from Peru to the United States have increased. We are consulting with 
the range countries to clarify the support for, and the anticipated 
effects of, this proposal. We will work with range countries and other 
Parties on this proposal to promote sustainable forest management and 
conservation of this species.
    Prop. 34. Amendment of the annotation to exempt certain 
artificially propagated hybrids of Orchidaceae (interspecific and 
intergeneric hybrids of Cymbidium, Dendrobium, Miltonia, Odontoglossum, 
Oncidium, Phalaenopsis and Vanda) included in Appendix II. Proposed by 
Switzerland. Tentative U.S. negotiating position: Oppose. This proposal 
would merge existing taxon-specific exemptions on the Orchidaceae 
family, but more importantly would broaden exemptions for artificially 
propagated hybrids to include the genera Miltonia, Odontoglossum, and 
Oncidium. There are concerns that the exemption of New World genera 
would create enforcement problems for range countries, a sentiment that 
was previously raised at CoP12 and CoP13.
    Prop. 35. Amendment of the annotation to exempt certain 
artificially propagated hybrids of Orchidaceae (interspecific and 
intergeneric hybrids of Cymbidium, Dendrobium, Phalaenopsis, and Vanda) 
included in Appendix II. Proposed by Switzerland as the Depositary 
Government, at the request of the Plants Committee. Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Support. This proposal would replace confusing 
language in the existing taxon-specific orchid hybrid exemptions 
(referred to as footnote 8) with language proposed and agreed upon by 
consensus of the Plants Committee.
    Prop. 37. Deletion of the current annotation for Taxus chinensis, 
T. fuana, and T. sumatrana, and adoption of a new annotation for T. 
cuspidata in Appendix II. Proposed by Switzerland, as Depositary 
Government, at the request of the Standing Committee. Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Support Part A; oppose Part B of the proposal. 
The adoption of Part A of this proposal would delete the annotation to 
exempt labeled, potted artificially propagated plants of T. chinensis, 
T. fuana, and T. sumatrana from CITES regulations. Adoption of Part B 
would add a new annotation to the listing of T. cuspidata to exempt 
labeled, potted artificially propagated plants of hybrids and cultivars 
of the species from CITES regulations. This proposal seeks to rectify 
the adoption of an annotation at CoP13 for these taxa, which was 
subsequently determined to contravene the provisions of the Convention. 
However, it is the opinion of the United States that this proposal is 
similarly flawed in that it allows an exemption for whole plants or 
artificially propagated hybrids and cultivars of T. cuspidata, but does 
not exempt readily recognizable parts and derivatives.

Conclusion of the Meeting

    69. Determination of the time and venue of the next regular meeting 
of the Conference of the Parties (no document). Tentative U.S. 
negotiating position: Not applicable. The Secretariat does not normally 
circulate a document on the time and venue of the next CoP. We 
anticipate receiving information on this at CoP14, at which time the 
United States will develop a negotiating position. The United States 
favors holding CoP15 in a country where all Parties and observers will 
be admitted without political difficulties, and where facilities are 
available to ensure the safe and efficient conduct of the meeting.
    70. Closing Remarks (No document)

Future Actions

    During our regular public briefings at CoP14, we will discuss any 
changes in our negotiating positions. After CoP14, we will publish a 
notice to invite public input on whether the United States should take 
a reservation on any of the amendments to the CITES Appendices. Whereas 
CITES provides a period of 90 days from the close of a CoP for any 
Party to enter a reservation with respect to an amendment to Appendix I 
or II, the United States has never entered a reservation on any CITES 
listing. As discussed in the Federal Register notice of November 17, 
1987 (52 FR 43924), entering a reservation would do very little to 
relieve importers in the United States from the need for foreign export 
permits because the Lacey Act Amendments of 1981 (16 U.S.C. 3371 et 
seq.) make it a Federal offense to import into the United States any 
animals

[[Page 30623]]

taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of foreign 
conservation laws. If the foreign nation has enacted CITES, and has not 
taken a reservation with regard to any species, part, or derivative, 
the United States would continue to require CITES documents as a 
condition of import. A reservation by the United States also would 
provide exporters in this country with little relief from the need for 
U.S. export documents. Receiving countries that are party to CITES will 
require CITES-equivalent documentation from the United States even if 
it enters a reservation, because the Parties have agreed to allow trade 
with non-Parties (including reserving countries) only if they issue 
documents containing all of the information required on CITES permits 
and certificates, and only if the same findings have been made prior to 
issuance of the documents.

    Author: This notice was prepared by Clifton A. Horton, Division 
of Management Authority; under the authority of the U.S. Endangered 
Species Act of 1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).

    Dated: May 24, 2007.
Kenneth Stansell,
Acting Director.
[FR Doc. 07-2714 Filed 5-29-07; 11:34 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P