IELP CITES

International Environmental Law Project (IELP) Goes to CITES

NOVEMBER 14, 2002

Santiago, Chile

Thursday began with the finishing of some financial business in Committee II, then the meeting of the plenary body to finalize the recommendations received from the Committee meetings. Plenary offers the Parties one last opportunity to debate their species proposals and draft resolutions and hopefully overturn the recommendations of the Committees. To re-open the debate a simple majority vote is required. Then the proposal is treated to a short debate and another vote. If the proponents get a two-thirds majority the proposal or the resolution passes.

Georgia took this opportinty to re-open debate on the Black Sea bottle nose dolphin. With IELP Director Chris Wold´s assistance, Georgia amended its original proposal. First, the proposal was narrowed in scope by seeking to place a zero export quota for trade for commercial purposes and retention of the population on Appendix II. This amendment would provide a level of protection to that which would be obtained on Appendix I. Furthermore, the proposal was amended to base the listing on the dolphin as a distinct population rather than a sub-species. The evidence that the dolphin is a sub-species was not clear to all the parties, and categorizing it as a distinct population simplified the debate. In the end, despite opposition by the familiar adversaries to listing marine species, the Black Sea bottle nosed dolphin obtained its requisite votes and is now protected from the harms of commercial trade. There still remains the threats that pollution and by-catch pose to the dolphin, but some solace can be taken from knowledge that CITES has protected the dolphin to the extent possible within its authority.

To our chagrin Japan re-opened the debate on minke whales. They reduced the number of stocks to be down-listed to one, but also sought to expand the scope of the proposal by seeking to include introduction from the sea. Repeating the sequence from last week, the Secretariat rejected the amendment as being an expansion of scope and therefore prohibited by the rules of procedure. Japan repeated its opposition, then repeated its arguments for downlisting. This was followed by the pro-whaling contingent-Japan, Norway, Iceland, and Antigua-Barbuda-each taking their turn at the microphone, each reiterating familiar points. At this point the arguments and the animation from some of these Parties became quite stale. It seemed like a pointless endeavor to seek to overcome a 18 vote deficit with questionable amendments and rehashed arguments. Not surprisingly, the proposal was rejected easily.

Once the vote had been counted the day was at an end. This was a disappointment for the proponents for listing the whale shark and the basking shark. These parties had hoped for the plenary to move fast so that the proposals could be addressed before the close of the day. There was concern that with some delegates leaving Friday, these species proposals would lose votes if not addressed Thursday. Only the next day would tell if votes were lost. For the time being some observers wondered if there was not some strategy behind re-opening debate on whales and re-hashing old arguments. Even if there was no underlying strategy, the tactics with which the proponents sought to achieve their goals had become quite transparent and hard to sympathize with.

Thus we entered the final day happy for the Georgian delegate who had conluded earlier remarks by exclaiming, "God bless dolphins," and hopeful that a similar outcome awaited the proposals to list the whale shark and basking shark.

Submitted by Rick Till

Links

DAILY REPORTS