[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 247 (Thursday, December 26, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Pages 105074-105089]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-30698]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR
Fish and Wildlife Service
[Docket No. FWS-HQ-IA-2024-0033; FXIA16710900000-245-FF09A10000]
Conference of the Parties to the Convention on International
Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES); Twentieth
Regular Meeting: Taxa Being Considered for Amendments to the CITES
Appendices and Proposed Resolutions, Decisions, and Agenda Items Being
Considered; Observer Information
AGENCY: Fish and Wildlife Service, Interior.
ACTION: Notice.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The United States, as a Party to the Convention on
International
[[Page 105075]]
Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), may
propose amendments to the CITES Appendices for consideration at
meetings of the Conference of the Parties. The twentieth regular
meeting of the Conference of the Parties to CITES (CoP20) is scheduled
to be held in Uzbekistan, November 24-December 5, 2025. With this
notice, we respond to recommendations received from the public
concerning proposed amendments to the CITES Appendices (species
proposals) and proposed resolutions, decisions, and agenda items that
the United States might submit for consideration at CoP20; invite your
comments and information on these potential proposals and working
documents; and provide information on how U.S. nongovernmental
organizations can attend CoP20 as observers.
DATES:
Meeting: The meeting is scheduled to be held in Samarkand,
Uzbekistan, November 24-December 5, 2025.
Submitting Information and Comments: We will consider written
information and comments we receive by January 16, 2025.
ADDRESSES:
Comments: You may submit comments pertaining to species proposals
for consideration at CoP20 by one of the following methods:
(1) Electronically: Using the Federal eRulemaking Portal: https://www.regulations.gov, search for and submit comments on FWS-HQ-IA-2024-
0033, which is the docket number for this notice.
(2) U.S. mail: Submit by U.S. mail to Public Comments Processing;
Attn: Docket No. FWS-HQ-IA-2024-0033; U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service;
MS: PRB (JAO/3W); 5275 Leesburg Pike, Falls Church, VA 22041-3803.
Requesting Approval To Attend CoP20 as an Observer: Send your
request via U.S. mail to the Division of Management Authority, U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 5275 Leesburg Pike, MS: IA, Falls Church, VA
22041; via email to [email protected]; or via fax to 703-358-
2276.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For information pertaining to species
proposals, contact Rosemarie Gnam, Head, Division of Scientific
Authority, at 703-358-1708 (phone); 703-358-2276 (fax); or
[email protected] (email). For information pertaining to
resolutions, decisions, and agenda items, contact Naimah Aziz, Head,
Division of Management Authority, at 703-358-2028 (phone); 703-358-2298
(fax); or [email protected] (email).
Individuals in the United States who are deaf, deafblind, hard of
hearing, or have a speech disability may dial 711 (TTY, TDD, or
TeleBraille) to access telecommunications relay services. Individuals
outside the United States should use the relay services offered within
their country to make international calls to the point-of- contact in
the United States.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background
The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild
Fauna and Flora, hereinafter referred to as CITES or the Convention, is
an international treaty designed to control and regulate international
trade in certain animal and plant species that are or may be affected
by trade and are now, or potentially may become, threatened with
extinction. Species are included in the Appendices to CITES, which are
available on the CITES Secretariat's website at https://www.cites.org.
See https://www.cites.org/eng/app/appendices.php; 50 CFR 23.91(a) (How
do I find out if a species is listed? The official CITES list includes
species of wildlife and plants placed in Appendix I, II, and III in
accordance with the provisions of Articles XV and XVI of the Treaty.
This list is maintained by the CITES Secretariat (Secretariat) based on
decisions of the Parties. You can access the official list from the
CITES website (see Sec. 23.7).); 50 CFR 23.7(f).
Currently there are 184 Parties to CITES--183 countries, including
the United States, and one regional economic integration organization,
the European Union. The Convention calls for regular biennial meetings
of the Conference of the Parties (CoP) unless the Conference decides
otherwise. At these meetings, the Parties review the implementation of
CITES, make provisions enabling the Secretariat in Switzerland to carry
out its functions, consider amendments to the species included in
Appendices I and II, consider reports presented by the Secretariat, and
make recommendations for the improved effectiveness of CITES. Any
country that is a Party to CITES may propose amendments to Appendices I
and II, as well as resolutions, decisions, and agenda items for
consideration by all the Parties. The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
(Service) regulations governing this public process are found in title
50 of the Code of Federal Regulations at 50 CFR 23.87.
The Endangered Species Act (ESA; 16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.), in part,
implements CITES and incorporates its Appendices of CITES-listed
species into U.S. law (see, e.g., 16 U.S.C. 1532(4), 1537a, 1538(c),
1538(g), 1539(g), 1540(f)), and the Service has promulgated U.S. CITES
implementing regulations (see 50 CFR part 23). The Secretary of the
Interior is designated the U.S. Management Authority and U.S.
Scientific Authority for CITES purposes, and the respective functions
of each are carried out by the Service. 16 U.S.C. 1537a; 50 CFR 23.6.
The ESA prohibits, inter alia, ``any person subject to the jurisdiction
of the United States to engage in any trade in any specimens contrary
to the provisions of the Convention, or to possess any specimens traded
contrary to the provisions of the Convention.'' 16 U.S.C. 1538(c); 16
U.S.C. 1532(4) (``The term ``Convention'' means the Convention on
International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora,
signed on March 3, 1973, and the appendices thereto.''). U.S. CITES
implementing regulations explain the administration of CITES, the CITES
listing process, the effective dates of CITES listings, and where to
find official CITES documents and the CITES Appendices, as set forth in
50 CFR 23.7 and 23.84-23.91. At least 150 days before any CoP is held,
any Party may submit a proposed amendment to Appendix I or II (e.g.,
for a species to be included in, removed from, or transferred between
the CITES Appendices). CITES Art. XV(1)(a); 50 CFR 23.87(b)(2). The
Secretariat then makes publicly available and provides all Parties a
list of proposed amendments. CITES Art. XV(1)(a), (2)(c); 50 CFR
23.7(f)(5). Pursuant to 50 CFR 23.7 and 23.86, as we receive
information on the upcoming CoP, we notify the public through Federal
Register notices or on our website. The CoP can adopt amendments to
Appendices I and II by a two-thirds majority of those Parties in
attendance. 50 CFR 23.85(a); CITES Art. XV(1)(b). Appendix-I and -II
species listings adopted at the CoP are effective 90 days after the
last day of the CoP, unless otherwise specified in the proposal. 50 CFR
23.91(b)(1); CITES Art. XV(1)(c); 72 FR 48402 at 48439 and 48492-48494,
August 23, 2007; 71 FR 20168 at 20205-20207, April 19, 2006.
This is our second notice in a series of Federal Register notices
that, together with an announced public meeting that we will hold
approximately 2 to 3 months prior to CoP20, provide you with an
opportunity to participate in the development of the U.S. submissions
and negotiating positions for CoP20. With this notice, we describe
proposed amendments to the CITES Appendices (species proposals) and
proposed resolutions, decisions, and agenda items
[[Page 105076]]
that the United States might submit for consideration at CoP20; invite
your comments and information on these proposals and other documents;
and provide information on how U.S. nongovernmental organizations can
attend CoP20 as observers.
We published our first CoP20-related Federal Register notice on
March 22, 2024 (89 FR 20489), in which we requested information and
recommendations on animal and plant species proposals, and information
and recommendations on proposed resolutions, decisions, and agenda
items for the United States to consider submitting for consideration at
CoP20, and provided preliminary information on how to request approved
observer status for nongovernmental organizations that wish to attend
the meeting. Comments received on our March 22, 2024, notice can be
viewed at https://www.regulations.gov in Docket No. FWS-HQ-IA-2024-
0033.
Recommendations for Species Proposals for the United States To Consider
Submitting for CoP20
In response to our March 2024 notice, we received 46 comments with
recommendations from 19 individuals and 25 organizations for possible
proposals involving almost 3,500 animal taxa and 13 plant taxa for
amendments to the CITES Appendices. The commenters include
organizations such as the Association of Zoos and Aquariums, Animal
Welfare Institute, California Native Plant Society, Center for
Biological Diversity, Humane Society International, International Fund
for Animal Welfare, IUCN (International Union for Conservation of
Nature) Species Survival Commission Specialist Groups, International
Wood Products Association, League of American Orchestras, Natural
Resource Defense Council, Safari Club International, Species Survival
Network, United Plant Savers, Wildlife Conservation Society, and World
Wildlife Fund. Additionally, the United States may consider two animal
species (United States is a range country) proposals that previously
resulted from the Periodic Review process (Resolution Conf. 14.8 (Rev.
CoP17)) by the Animals Committee, and where that Committee recommended
that Mexico, as a range country for the species being reviewed, bring
forward a proposal to amend the Appendices.
We have undertaken initial evaluations of the available trade and
biological information on many of these taxa, but we recognize that
many of the commenters provided little biological, trade, and other
information with which to support their comments. Based on the limited
information available, we made provisional evaluations of whether to
proceed with the development of proposals for species to be included
in, removed from, or transferred between the CITES Appendices. We made
these evaluations by considering the best information available on the
species; the presence, absence, and effectiveness of other mechanisms
that may preclude the need for species' inclusion in the CITES
Appendices (e.g., range country actions or other international
agreements); and availability of resources. We have also considered the
following factors, as per the United States' approach for CoP20
discussed in the March 22, 2024, Federal Register notice (89 FR 20489):
(1) Does the proposed action address a serious wildlife or plant
trade issue that the United States is experiencing as a range country
for species in trade?
(2) Does the proposed action address a serious wildlife or plant
trade issue for species not native to the United States?
(3) Does the proposed action provide additional conservation
benefit for a species already covered by another international
agreement?
Based on our initial evaluations, we have assigned each taxon to
one of three categories, which reflects the likelihood of our
submitting a proposal. In sections A, B, and C, below, we have listed
the current status of each species proposal recommended by the public,
as well as some species proposals we have been developing internally or
from the Periodic Review process. Please note that we have provided
here only a list of taxa and the proposed action of likely, unlikely,
or undecided on whether to submit a species proposal for consideration
at CoP20. We have posted an extended table version of this notice on
our website (at https://www.fws.gov/program/international-affairs/federal-register-notices) with text describing in more detail certain
proposed actions and explaining the rationale for the tentative U.S.
position on these possible proposals. We also describe in this table
the information that we are seeking for proposals where the United
States is undecided on submission. Copies of the extended table version
of the notice are also available from the Division of Scientific
Authority at the above address or at https://www.regulations.gov at
Docket No. FWS-HQ-IA-2024-0033.
We welcome your comments, especially if you are able to provide any
additional biological or trade information on these species. Please
note that, throughout this notice, an asterisk (*) indicates species
that occur in the United States of America or its territories.
A. What species proposals will the United States likely submit for
consideration at CoP20?
The two taxa in this section have undergone review through the
Periodic Review of the Appendices by the Animals Committee (AC), most
recently at its 33rd meeting (AC33; Geneva, July 2024), in accordance
with Resolution Conf. 14.8 (Rev. CoP17). This is a regular process
under CITES to evaluate whether listings of taxa in CITES Appendices I
and II continue to be appropriate, based on current biological and
trade information.
Mexico undertook the periodic review evaluation for these two taxa
and submitted the results of their review for consideration at AC33
(https://cites.org/sites/default/files/documents/E-AC33-45-03.pdf and
https://cites.org/sites/default/files/documents/E-AC33-45-04.pdf). The
Animals Committee supported Mexico's recommendation that the two seal
taxa be transferred from Appendix I to Appendix II and invited Mexico
to bring proposals to CoP20. Since the United States is a range country
for these taxa, we invite comments on such proposals.
1. * Guadalupe fur seal (Arctocephalus townsendi)--Transfer from
Appendix I to Appendix II (Periodic Review Process by Mexico)
2. * Caribbean monk seal (Monachus tropicalis)--Transfer from Appendix
I to Appendix II (Periodic Review Process by Mexico)
B. On what species proposals is the United States undecided, pending
additional information and consultations?
The United States is still undecided on whether to submit CoP20
proposals for the following taxa. In most cases, we have not completed
our consultations with relevant range countries. In other cases, we
expect meetings to occur in the immediate future, at which participants
will generate important recommendations, trade analyses, or biological
information on the taxon in question that may be useful to our final
decision making.
Plants
3. * White sage (Salvia apiana)--Add to Appendix II
4. Apitong, keruing, yang, gurjan (Dipterocarpus spp. [65 species])--
Add to Appendix II
5. * American ginseng (Panax quinquefolius) Araliaceae (ginseng)
family--Transfer from Appendix II to Appendix I, or alternately a
proposal
[[Page 105077]]
to amend Annotation #3 or to submit a working document to address
issues relating to trade in American ginseng
Mammals
6. Painted wooly bat (Kerivoula picta)--Add to Appendix II
7. Sloths (Bradypus spp. and Choloepus spp.)--Add all non-CITES species
to Appendix II
Birds
8. African hornbills (Ceratogymna and Bycanistes)--Add all species to
Appendix II
9. * Peregrine falcon (Falco peregrinus)--Transfer from Appendix I to
Appendix II
Reptiles
10. Order Testudines or all Freshwater turtles [~348 species, ~139 not
listed in CITES or listed as Appendix III]--Include all species in at
least Appendix II [~139 species]; transfer all IUCN-assessed threatened
or endangered species from Appendix II to Appendix I (we are
considering all native species not currently listed in Appendix II = 22
native species as well as 2 native species that are threatened or
endangered species for Appendix I--see turtle species below)
11. * Western pond turtle (Actinemys marmorata)--Include all species
not currently listed in Appendix II
12. * Southwestern pond turtle (Actinemys pallida)--Include all species
not currently listed in Appendix II
13. * Painted turtle (Chrysemys picta) (including C. p. dorsalis)--
Include all species not currently listed in Appendix II
14. * Chicken turtle (Deirochelys reticularia)--Include all species not
currently listed in Appendix II
15. * Alabama red-bellied turtle (Pseudemys alabamensis)--Include all
species not currently listed in Appendix II
16. * Eastern river cooter (Pseudemys concinna)--Include all species
not currently listed in Appendix II
17. * Florida cooter (Pseudemys floridana)--Include all species not
currently listed in Appendix II
18. * Rio Grande cooter (Pseudemys gorzugi)--Include all species not
currently listed in Appendix II
19. * Florida redbelly turtle (Pseudemys nelsoni)--Include all species
not currently listed in Appendix II
20. * Peninsula cooter (Pseudemys peninsularis)--Include all species
not currently listed in Appendix II
21. * Northern red-bellied turtle (Pseudemys rubriventris)--Include
all species not currently listed in Appendix II
22. * Texas river cooter (Pseudemys texana)--Include all species not
currently listed in Appendix II
23. * Big Bend slider (Trachemys gaigeae)--Include all species not
currently listed in Appendix II
24. * Red-eared slider (Trachemys scripta)--Include all species not
currently listed in Appendix II 23.
25. * Cagle's map turtle (Graptemys caglei)--Include all species not
currently listed in Appendix II
26. * Northern map turtle (Graptemys geographica)--Include all species
not currently listed in Appendix II 25.
27. * Black-knobbed map turtle (Graptemys nigrinoda)--Include all
species not currently listed in Appendix II
28. * Ringed map turtle (Graptemys oculifera)--Include all species not
currently listed in Appendix II
29. * Ouachita map turtle (Graptemys ouachitensis)--Include all
species not currently listed in Appendix II
30. * False map turtle (Graptemys pseudogeographica)--Include all
species not currently listed in Appendix II
31. * Texas map turtle (Graptemys versa)--Include all species not
currently listed in Appendix II
32. * Yellow-blotched sawback (Graptemys flavimaculata)--Include all
species not currently listed in Appendix II
33. * Spotted turtle (Clemmys guttata)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
34. * Blanding's turtle (Emydoidea blandingii)--Transfer from Appendix
II to Appendix I
35. Home's hingeback tortoise (Kinixys homeana)--Transfer from
Appendix II to Appendix I
36. * Rattlesnakes (Crotalus spp. [44 species])--Add to Appendix II
[44 species]
37. * Timber rattlesnake (Crotalus horridus)--Add to Appendix II
38. * Western rattlesnake (Crotalus oreganus)--Add to Appendix II
39. * Prairie rattlesnake (Crotalus viridis)--Add to Appendix II
40. Blue-spotted tree monitor (Varanus macraei)--Transfer from
Appendix II to Appendix I
Amphibians
41. Sonoran Desert Toad (Incilius alvarius)--Add to Appendix II
Sharks and Rays
42. * Oceanic whitetip shark (Carcharhinus longimanus)--Transfer from
Appendix II to Appendix I
43. Gulper sharks or deepwater sharks (Centrophoridae family)--Add to
Appendix II
44. * Gulper shark (Centrophorus granulosus)--Add to Appendix I
45. * Mosaic gulper shark (Centrophorus tessellatus)--Add to Appendix
I or II
46. * Little gulper shark (Centrophorus uyato)--Add to Appendix I or
II
47. * Whale shark (Rhincodon typus)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
Bony fishes
48. Banggai cardinalfish (Pterapogon kauderni)--Add to Appendix II
49. * American eel (Anguilla rostrata)--Add to Appendix II
Invertebrates
50. * Chocolate chip or four-sided or three-rowed sea cucumber
(Isostichopus badionotus)--Add to Appendix II
51. Brown sea cucumber (Isostichopus fuscus)--Transfer from Appendix
III (Ecuador) to Appendix I
52. * Stichopod sea cucumber (Isostichopus macroparentheses)--Add to
Appendix II
53. * Stichopod sea cucumber (Isostichopus maculatus)--Add to Appendix
II
54. Golden sandfish (Holothuria lessoni)--Add to Appendix II
55. * Curryfish, Herrmann's sea cucumber (Stichopus herrmanni)--Add to
Appendix II (was suggested for Appendix I)
56. * American horseshoe crab (Limulus polyphemus)--Add to Appendix I
or II
57. Red and pink coral (Corallium spp. [~20+ spp.])--Add to Appendix
II
C. For which species is the United States unlikely to submit proposals
for consideration at CoP20, unless we receive significant additional
information?
The United States does not intend to submit proposals for the
following taxa unless we receive significant additional information
indicating that a proposal is warranted.
Plants
58. * California lady's slipper (Cypripedium californicum) Orchidaceae
(orchid) family--Transfer from Appendix II to Appendix I
59. * Mountain lady's slipper (Cypripedium montanum) Orchidaceae
(orchid) family--Transfer from Appendix II to Appendix I
60. * Sparrow's-egg lady's slipper (Cypripedium passerinum)
Orchidaceae (orchid) family--Transfer from Appendix II to Appendix I
61. * Two-keeled hooded orchid (Galeandra bicarinata) Orchidaceae
[[Page 105078]]
(orchid) family--Transfer from Appendix II to Appendix I
62. * American elm (Ulmus americana)--Add to Appendix I
63. * Green ash (Fraxinus pennsylvanica) Oleaceae (olive) family--Add
to Appendix I
64. * Longleaf pine (Pinus palustris) Pinaceae (pine) family--Add to
Appendix I
65. * Redbay (Persea borbonia) Lauraceae (laurels) family--Add to
Appendix I
66. * Swamp bay (Persea palustris) Lauraceae (laurels) family--Add to
Appendix I
67. * White ash (Fraxinus americana) Oleaceae (olive) family--Add to
Appendix I
Animals
Mammals
68. Dorcas gazelle (Gazella dorcas)--Transfer from Appendix III to
Appendix I
69. Dwarf musk deer (Moschus berezovskii)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
70. Goitered gazelle (Gazella subgutturosa)--Add to Appendix I
71. Hippopotamus (Hippopotamus amphibius)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
72. Hog deer (Axis porcinus)--Transfer from Appendix III to Appendix I
73. Javan deer (Rusa timorensis)--Add to Appendix I
74. Lowland tapir (Tapirus terrestris)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
75. Mountain nyala (Tragelaphus buxtoni)--Add to Appendix I
76. Musk deer (Moschus moschiferus)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
77. * Polar bear (Ursus maritimus)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
78. * Reindeer/caribou (Rangifer tarandus)--Add to Appendix I
79. Sambar deer (Rusa unicolor)--Add to Appendix I
80. * Sea otter (Enhydra lutris)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I (one subspecies, Enhydra lutris nereis, is listed in
Appendix I)
81. White-lipped peccary (Tayassu pecari)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
Birds
82. * Aleutian cackling goose, Aleutian Canada goose, Aleutian goose
(Branta canadensis leucopareia)--Remove from Appendix II [i.e., remove
from CITES Appendices]
83. Copsychus (genus) [Magpie-robins and shamas including Kittacinca
spp.; 10 species; 1 species, Copsychus malabaricus, listed in Appendix
II]--Add to Appendix II [9 species]
84. Great curassow (Crax rubra)--Transfer from Appendix III to
Appendix I
85. Long-tailed parakeet (Belocercus longicaudus)--Transfer from
Appendix II to Appendix I
86. R[uuml]ppell's vulture (Gyps rueppelli)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
87. Steppe eagle (Aquila nipalensis)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
88. White-backed vulture (Gyps africanus)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
Reptiles
89. Agama lizard (Trapelus savignii)--Add to Appendix II
90. Asian giant tortoise (Manouria emys)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
91. * Barbour's map turtle (Graptemys barbouri)--Transfer from
Appendix II to Appendix I
92. Black marsh turtle (Siebenrockiella crassicollis)--Transfer from
Appendix II to Appendix I
93. Burmese python (Python bivittatus)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
94. * Diamondback terrapin (Malaclemys terrapin)--Transfer from
Appendix II to Appendix I
95. Dwarf chameleon (Bradypodion thamnobates)--Transfer from Appendix
II to Appendix I
96. Egyptian spiny-tailed lizard (Uromastyx aegyptia)--Transfer from
Appendix II to Appendix I
97. King cobra (Ophiophagus hannah)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
98. Leopard fringe-fingered lizard (Acanthodactylus pardalis)--Add to
Appendix I
99. Masked water snakes, puff-faced water snakes (Homalopsis spp. [5
species])--Add to Appendix II [5 species]
100. * Massasauga rattlesnake (Sistrurus catenatus)--Add to Appendix
II
101. * Pascagoula map turtle (Graptemys gibbonsi)--Transfer from
Appendix II to Appendix I
102. * Pearl River map turtle (Graptemys pearlensis)--Transfer from
Appendix II to Appendix I
103. Pig nose turtle (Carettochelys insculpta)--Transfer from Appendix
II to Appendix I
104. Senegal flapshell turtle (Cyclanorbis senegalensis)--Transfer
from Appendix II to Appendix I
105. Red-headed rat snake (Elaphe moellendorffi)--Transfer from
Appendix II to Appendix I
106. White-bellied snapping turtle (Elseya branderhorsti)--Add to
Appendix II
Amphibians
107. Harlequin frogs, stubfoot toads (Atelopus spp. ~94+ species; 1
species already included in CITES Appendix I: Atelopus zetek)--Add to
Appendix I
108. Phantasmal poison frog (Epipedobates tricolor)--Transfer from
Appendix II to Appendix I
109. Clown tree frog/harlequin poison frog (Oophaga histrionica)--
Transfer from Appendix II to Appendix I
110. Lehmann's poision frog (Oophaga lehmanni)--Transfer from Appendix
II to Appendix I
111. * Pigeon Mountain salamander (Plethodon petraeus)--Add to
Appendix I
Sharks and Rays
112. * Scalloped hammerhead (Sphyrna lewini)--Transfer from Appendix
II to Appendix I
113. * Smooth hammerhead (Sphyrna zygaena)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
114. * Silky shark (Carcharhinus falciformis)--Transfer from Appendix
II to Appendix I
115. * Basking shark (Cetorhinus maximus)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
116. * Longfin mako (Isurus paucus)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
117. * Shortfin mako (Isurus oxyrinchus)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
118. * Common thresher (Alopias vulpinus)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
119. * Pelagic thresher shark (Alopias pelagicus)--Transfer from
Appendix II to Appendix I
120. * Great White shark (Carcharodon carcharias)--Transfer from
Appendix II to Appendix I
121. * Kitefin shark (Dalatias licha)--Add to Appendix I or III
122. * Tope (Galeorhinus galeus)--Add to Appendix I or II
123. * Porbeagle (Lamna nasu)--Transfer from Appendix II to Appendix I
124. * Spiny dogfish (Squalus acanthias)--Add to Appendix I
125. * Atlantic nurse shark (Ginglymostoma cirratum)--Add to Appendix
II
126. Common smoothhound shark (Mustelus mustelus)--Add to Appendix I
127. * Sand tiger shark (Carcharias taurus)--Add to Appendix I
[[Page 105079]]
128. * Atlantic devilray (Mobula hypostoma)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
129. * Sicklefin devilray (Mobula tarapacana)--Transfer from Appendix
II to Appendix I
130. * Spotted eagle ray (Aetobatus ocellatus)--Add to Appendix I
131. * Whitespotted eagle ray (Aetobatus narinari)--Add to Appendix II
132. * Bullnose eagle ray (Myliobatis freminvillii)--Add to Appendix
II
133. * American cownose ray (Rhinoptera bonasus)--Add to Appendix II
134. * Spiny butterfly ray (Gymnura altavela)--Add to Appendix II
135. Porcupine ray (Urogymnus asperrimus)--Add to Appendix I
136. Tiger River stingray (Potamotrygon tigrina)--Add to Appendix I
137. Dasyatidae (stingrays from S. and SE Asia; ~68 ssp)--Add to
Appendix II
138. * Winter skate (Leucoraja ocellata)--Add to Appendix I
139. * Thorny skate (Amblyraja radiata)--Add to Appendix I
Jawless Fish
140. * Pacific hagfish (Eptatretus stoutii)--Add to Appendix I or II
Bony Fishes
141. Freshwater eels (Anguilla spp.)--Add to Appendix II
142. European eel (Anguilla anguilla)--Add to Appendix I
143. Japanese eel (Anguilla japonica)--Add to Appendix I
144. Snowflake moray eel (Echidna nebulosa)--Add to Appendix II
145. Siberian sturgeon (Acipenser baerii)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
146. Russian sturgeon (Acipenser gueldenstaedtii)--Transfer from
Appendix II to Appendix I
147. Sterlet (Acipenser ruthenus)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
148. Sakhalin sturgeon (Acipenser schrenckii)--Transfer from Appendix
II to Appendix I
149. Stellate sturgeon (Acipenser stellatus)--Transfer from Appendix
II to Appendix I
150. Kaluga sturgeon (Huso dauricus)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
151. Beluga sturgeon (Huso huso)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
152. White-seam betta (Betta albimarginata)--Add to Appendix I
153. Spotfin betta (Betta macrostoma)--Add to Appendix I
154. Sim's betta (Betta simorum)--Add to Appendix I
155. Black damselfish (Chrysiptera niger)--Add to Appendix I or II
156. * Atlantic bluefin tuna (Thunnus thynnus)--Add to Appendix I
157. * Pacific bluefin tuna (Thunnus orientalis)--Add to Appendix I
158. * Bigeye tuna (Thunnus obesus)--Add to Appendix I
159. * Brown-marbled grouper (Epinephelus fuscoguttatus)--Add to
Appendix I
160. * Camouflage grouper (Epinephelus polyphekadion)--Add to Appendix
I
161. * Nassau grouper (Epinephelus striatus; global and Gulf of
Mexico)--Add to Appendix III
162. * Red grouper (Epinephelus morio)--Add to Appendix I
163. * Black grouper (Mycteroperca bonaci)--Add to Appendix I
164. * Yellow-fin grouper [Gulf of Mexico] (Mycteroperca venenosa)--
Add to Appendix I
165. * Yellowmouth grouper (Mycteroperca interstitialis)--Add to
Appendix I
166. * Squaretail coral grouper (Plectropomus areolatus)--Add to
Appendix I
167. * Bluefish (Pomatomus saltatrix)--Add to Appendix I
168. * Blue marlin (Makaira nigricans)--Add to Appendix I
169. Cubera snapper (Lutjanus cyanopterus)--Add to Appendix I
170. * Red snapper (Lutjanus campechanus)--Add to Appendix I
171. * Vermilion snapper (Rhomboplites aurorubens)--Add to Appendix I
172. * Golden tilefish (Lopholatilus chamaeleonticeps)--Add to
Appendix I
173. * Hogfish (Lachnolaimus maximus)--Add to Appendix I
174. * Humphead wrasse (Cheilinus undulatus)--Transfer from Appendix
II to Appendix I
175. Naoko's fairy wrasse (Cirrhilabrus naokoae)--Add to Appendix II
176. * Mexican blindcat (Prietella phreatophila)--Add to Appendix I
177. * Tarpon (Megalops atlanticus)--Add to Appendix I
178. Clown goby (Callogobius amikami)--Add to Appendix II
179. * Peppermint goby (Coryphopterus lipernes)--Add to Appendix I
180. * Glass goby (Coryphopterus hyalinus)--Add to Appendix II
181. * Masked goby (Coryphopterus personatus)--Add to Appendix II
182. Barber goby (Elacatinus figaro)--Add to Appendix II
183. Broadstripe goby (Elacatinus prochilos)--Add to Appendix I or II
184. Striped catfish (Pangasianodon hypophthalmus)--Add to Appendix I
185. Phraya giant catfish (Pangasius sanitwongsei)--Add to Appendix I
186. Mekong tiger perch (Datnioides undecimradiatus)--Add to Appendix I
187. Harlequin sweetlips (Plectorhinchus chaetodonoides)--Add to
Appendix II
188. Boeseman's rainbowfish (Melanotaenia boesemani)--Add to Appendix I
189. Blackspotted croaker (Protonibea diacanthus)--Add to Appendix II
190. Tiger-tail seahorse (Hippocampus comes)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
191. * Lined seahorse (Hippocampus erectus)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
192. * Thorny seahorse (Hippocampus histrix)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
193. * Giant seahorse (Hippocampus ingens)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
194. Great seahorse (Hippocampus kelloggi)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
195. * Spotted seahorse (Hippocampus kuda)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
196. * Long-snout seahorse (Hippocampus reidi)--Transfer from Appendix
II to Appendix I (individual request to add to Appendix II, but is
already in Appendix II)
197. Flat-faced seahorse (Hippocampus trimaculatus)--Transfer from
Appendix II to Appendix I
Invertebrates
198. Cardinal shrimp (Caridina dennerli)--Add to Appendix I
199. Mangrove horseshoe crab (Carcinoscorpius rotundicauda)--Add to
Appendix I or II
200. Coastal horseshoe crab (Tachypleus gigas)--Add to Appendix I or II
201. Tri-spine horseshoe crab (Tachypleus tridentatus)--Add to Appendix
I or II
202. * Blue coral (Heliopora coerulea)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
203. * Cactus coral (Pavona cactus)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
204. * Cactus coral (Pavona decussata)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
205. * Daisy coral (Alveopora allingi)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
206. * Disc coral (Turbinaria mesenterina)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
207. * Disc coral (Turbinaria peltata)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
208. * Disc coral (Turbinaria reniformis)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
[[Page 105080]]
209. * Galaxy coral (Galaxea astreata)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
210. * Montipora coral (Montipora angulata)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
211. * Montipora coral (Montipora calcarea)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
212. * Montipora Coral (Montipora caliculata)--Transfer from Appendix
II to Appendix I
213. * Porites coral (Porites horizontalata)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
214. * Porites coral (Porites nigrescens)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
215. * Scleractinian coral (Psammocora stellata)--Transfer from
Appendix II to Appendix I
216. * Staghorn coral (Acropora acuminata)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
217. * Staghorn coral (Acropora aspera)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
218. * Staghorn coral (Acropora horrida)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
219. * Staghorn coral (Acropora paniculata)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
220. * Staghorn coral (Acropora polystoma)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
221. Elegance coral (Catalaphyllia jardinei)--Transfer from Appendix II
to Appendix I
222. * Elephant skin coral (Pachyseris rugosa)--Transfer from Appendix
II to Appendix I
223. * Large polyped stony corals (Euphyllia spp.)--Transfer from
Appendix II to Appendix I
224. Lettuce coral (Pectinia lactuca)--Transfer from Appendix II to
Appendix I
225. Long-tentacled plate coral (Heliofungia actiniformis)--Transfer
from Appendix II to Appendix I
226. Pearl bubble coral (Physogyra lichtensteini)--Transfer from
Appendix II to Appendix I
227. Small polyped stony corals (Acropora suharsonoi)--Transfer from
Appendix II to Appendix I
228. * Deep-water redfish (Actinopyga echinites)--Add to Appendix II
229. * Surf redfish (Actinopyga mauritiana)--Add to Appendix I or II
230. Panning's blackfish (Actinopyga palauensis)--Add to Appendix II
231. Burrowing blackfish (Actinopyga spinea)--Add to Appendix II
232. * Donkey dung sea cucumber (Holothuria mexicana)--Add to Appendix
II
233. Japanese spikey sea cucumber (Apostichopus japonicus)--Add to
Appendix I
234. * White teatfish (Holothuria fuscogilva)--Transfer from Appendix
II to Appendix I
235. * Florida cone (Conus anabathrum)--Add to Appendix II
236. * Freshwater pearl mussel (Margaritifera margaritifera)--Add to
Appendix I or II
237. * Hihiwai (Neritina granosa)--Add to Appendix I or II
238. * Pink abalone (Haliotis corrugata)--Add to Appendix I or II
239. * Green abalone (Haliotis fulgens)--Add to Appendix I or II
240. * Pinto abalone (Haliotis kamtschatkana)--Add to Appendix I or II
241. Giant armored trapdoor spider (Liphistius malayanus)--Add to
Appendix I
242. Indian tarantula (Thrigmopoeus insignis)--Add to Appendix I
243. Tarantulas (Typhochlaena spp. [5 species])--Add to Appendix I [5
species]
244. Tarantula family (Theraphosidae) [all ~1,080 unlisted spp.]--Add
to Appendix II
245. Mexican orange beauty tarantula (Brachypelma baumgarteni)--
Transfer from Appendix II to Appendix I
246. Mexican fireleg tarantula (Brachypelma boehmei)--Transfer from
Appendix II to Appendix I
247. Mexican redknee tarantula (Brachypelma hamorii)--Transfer from
Appendix II to Appendix I
248. Mexican blackvelvet tarantula (Brachypelma
schroederi)--Transfer from Appendix II to Appendix I
249. Wallace's giant bee (Megachile pluto, synonym Chalicodoma pluto)--
Add to Appendix I
Recommendations for Resolutions, Decisions, and Agenda Items for the
United States To Consider Submitting for CoP20
In response to the request in our first notice concerning possible
CoP20 submissions of resolutions, decisions, and agenda items, we
received information and recommendations from the following
organizations: Animal Welfare Institute, Association of Zoos &
Aquariums, Center for Biological Diversity, Defenders of Wildlife,
Environmental Investigation Agency, Humane Society International,
International Fund for Animal Welfare, International Wood Products
Association, Jamma International, League of American Orchestras,
Natural Resources Defense Council, Panthera, Safari Club International,
Species Survival Network, Wildlife Conservation Society, and World
Wildlife Fund. We also received comments from two individuals.
We evaluated the recommendations submitted by the above
organizations and individuals, as well as the factors described in the
U.S. approach for CoP20, discussed in our March 22, 2024, Federal
Register notice (89 FR 20489), in considering resolutions, decisions,
and agenda items that the United States may submit for consideration by
the Parties at CoP20. We also considered potential submissions that we
identified internally or based on discussions with other CITES Parties.
The United States may consider submitting documents on some of the
issues for which we are currently undecided or not considering
submitting at this time, depending on the outcome of discussions of
these issues in the CITES Standing Committee at its 78th meeting (SC78;
scheduled to be held February 3-8, 2025), additional consultations with
range country governments and subject matter experts, or comments we
receive during the public comment period for this notice.
We welcome your comments and information regarding the resolutions,
decisions, and agenda items discussed below. Please review the
information under ADDRESSES on how to submit information and comments
in response to this notice.
A. What resolutions, decisions, and agenda items is the United States
likely to submit for consideration at CoP20?
Due to the significant number of issues that are subject to ongoing
discussions in the Standing Committee, to date, we have not identified
any issues for which we are likely to submit a document to CoP20. As
described in this notice, we will make a final decision on whether to
submit a document to CoP20 for many issues described in this document
pending the outcomes and discussions at SC78.
B. On what resolutions, decisions, and agenda items is the United
States still undecided, pending additional information and
consultations?
1. Asian big cats: The World Wildlife Fund (WWF) notes that
Resolution Conf. 12.5 (Rev. CoP19) on Conservation of and trade in
tigers and other Appendix-I Asian big cat species instructs the
Secretariat to report to the Standing Committee and the Conference of
the Parties on the status of Asian big cats in the wild, their
conservation, and trade controls, using information provided by the
range countries and
[[Page 105081]]
other relevant countries. However, noting that the Secretariat rarely
receives many responses from Asian big cat range countries, WWF
recommends that the United States support the production of an
independently produced report for each meeting of the CoP, similar to
the process directed in Resolution Conf. 9.14 (Rev. CoP17) on
Conservation of and trade in African and Asian rhinoceroses for
rhinoceroses. While the United States shares the concerns over the lack
of information to help inform the preparation of robust reports, we are
also cognizant of the ongoing financial and administrative challenges
on the Secretariat and the Parties. Therefore, the United States is
currently undecided on whether to propose amendments to Resolution
Conf. 12.5 (Rev. CoP19) along the lines of WWF's suggestion. We will
continue to review this recommendation to determine a path forward on
this issue before CoP20.
2. Compliance matters: Noting the increase in the workload of the
Standing Committee to identify, investigate, and resolve potential
instances of non-compliance with the Convention, the Wildlife
Conservation Society (WCS) proposes that the compliance framework for
the Convention be reviewed holistically. WCS notes that this effort
could build on the outcomes from existing processes, including review
of the National Ivory Action Plan (NIAP) process, recent country-wide
reviews under the Review of Significant Trade (RST) process, etc., and
suggests that the United States either propose amendments to Resolution
Conf. 18.2 on Establishment of committees, to direct the establishment
of a Compliance and Enforcement Committee of CoP or submit a discussion
document that consolidates, standardizes, and strengthens approaches to
identifying and addressing non-compliance with the Convention. Noting
ongoing resource and capacity constraints, we are unlikely to propose
the establishment of a new committee of the CoP. However, based on
additional discussions internally and with like-minded Parties, we may
consider submitting a discussion document to examine options for
improving and strengthening approaches to identify and address
compliance matters.
3. Prioritization of sharks and rays in the review of significant
trade (RST) process: The International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW),
WCS, and Humane Society International (HSI) request that the United
States prioritize shark and ray species for all discussions related to
the RST and Article XIII compliance processes, to ensure CITES listings
are being implemented effectively and in line with CITES obligations.
Additionally, IFAW, WCS, and HSI recommend the United States consider
submitting draft amendments to Resolution Conf. 12.8 (Rev. CoP18) on
Review of Significant Trade in specimens of Appendix-II species to
increase the flexibility of the Animals Committee and the Plants
Committee to select a number of taxon/country or taxon/multiple country
or geographic area combinations of greatest concern, as appropriate.
The United States regards the RST process in CITES as an extremely
important and essential tool to ensure that trade in Appendix-II
species is biologically sustainable in the short and long term. The
ability to select an appropriate number of species/country combinations
of greatest concern already exists within the Resolution, and the RST
process is flexible to address the conservation concerns raised. We
understand the concerns notably for migratory and marine species such
as sharks that would allow for the selection of taxa at a broader
level, especially at geographic levels, and the concerns specifically
expressed at the 32nd meeting of the Animals Committee (AC32; Geneva,
June 2023). Any apparent constraints noted at recent meetings were
unrelated to the structure of the Resolution and were instead largely a
function of the time and resource constraints of the scientific
committees and the Secretariat, in particular with the added workload
during this intersessional period from work that was delayed during the
Covid-19 pandemic. We have actively engaged in the RST review process
at Animals, Plants, and Standing Committee meetings and support efforts
to build the capacity of CITES Parties. We are concerned about the
continued threats to sharks and rays. Therefore, we are considering
options to complement the RST process that have conservation benefits
to these species. We remain undecided on how best to accomplish such
objectives and seek input on possible solutions.
4. Trade in deepwater sharks and stingrays: IFAW, WCS, and HSI
recommend that the United States consider developing a proposal to
include internationally traded deepwater sharks in the Appendices. In
addition, IFAW, WCS, and HSI express concerns about the wider trades of
stingray leather (particularly the family Dasyatidae), and shark and
ray meat, and recommend the United States consider submitting any
information it may have on such trade to the relevant CITES committees
and consider if additional species should be included in Appendix II.
Please refer to the Recommendations for Species Proposals for the
United States To Consider Submitting for CoP20 section of this notice
on possible species proposals for information on what the United States
is likely, undecided, or unlikely to propose at CoP20.
5. Mismatch of trade in CITES-listed shark species: IFAW, WCS, and
HSI encourage the United States to make mismatch of the trade in
products of CITES-listed sharks a priority at CoP20, ensuring that firm
steps are taken to address the issue of underreporting of CITES-listed
sharks and rays in trade. The Standing Committee at SC78 is expected to
discuss numerous ongoing CITES compliance issues, including those
regarding CITES-listed sharks. The United States takes CITES compliance
issues seriously. The mismatch of the trade in products of CITES-listed
sharks recorded in the CITES Trade Database remains a concern to the
United States. We will closely monitor the outcomes and recommendations
from SC78 and determine whether it will be appropriate to submit a
document to CoP20 on this matter.
6. Confiscation of live animals: IFAW recommends that the United
States consider amendments to Resolution Conf. 17.8 (Rev. CoP19) on
Disposal of illegally traded and con[filig]scated specimens of CITES-
listed species, and its annexes, revising terms such as ``disposal''
and ``euthanasia'' to more accurately reflect the task required of
Parties. They note that disposal generally refers to non-sentient
beings and humane killing would be a more accurate alternative to
euthanasia. They also suggest updating Resolution Conf. 17.8 (Rev.
CoP19) to align it with the IUCN Guidelines for the management of
confiscated, live organisms, and call for adding guidance to the
Resolution on immediate handling of confiscated live animals to assist
enforcers in decision making, and how to repatriate healthy animals to
their country of origin to contribute to conservation of the wild
populations.
While the United States appreciates the recommendation to review
the terms ``disposal'' and ``euthanasia'' to ensure they accurately
reflect the task required of Parties, we believe that the current terms
are adequate. ``Management'' is a term typically used when describing
stockpiles (parts and products, and not live specimens). Similarly,
disposal refers to specifying a destination for the specimens.
Regarding the recommendation to update Resolution Conf. 17.8 (Rev.
CoP19), we are undecided at this time, including
[[Page 105082]]
regarding the suggestion to better align it with the IUCN Guidelines
and otherwise, pending the outcome of discussions related to Decision
19.174 on Disposal of confiscated specimens at SC78.
7. National Ivory Action Plans (NIAP) process: IFAW encourages the
United States to ensure that CoP20 delivers outcomes regarding
Decisions 19.68 to 19.70 on Review of the National Ivory Action Plans
Process, which direct the Secretariat, subject to external funding, to
contract a consultant to review the NIAP process in order to improve
its ability to enable action on the ground and provide capacity support
for countries that have been identified as sources of significant
concern in the global ivory trade.
The United States continues to support the NIAP process and is an
active participant in the Standing Committee's intersessional working
group that is currently considering the relationship between the
Elephant Trade Information System, which informs NIAP decisions, and
the CITES Annual Illegal Trade Report. We are concerned with the lack
of progress toward implementing the NIAP review recommendations and
will consider ways to advance these initiatives at CoP20.
8. Expiration of permits in transit: In Section XII (Regarding
permits and certificates for timber species included in Appendices II
and III with the annotation `Logs, sawn wood and veneer sheets') of
Resolution Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP19) on Permits and certificates, inter
alia, the Parties recognize that there are certain circumstances where
it may be appropriate to extend the period of validity of an export
permit or re-export certificate beyond the normal maximum of 6 months
after the date of issuance for timber shipments. The International Wood
Products Association (IWPA) urges the United States to work with other
Parties to update the language to reflect current processes and ensure
that shipments of properly permitted timber species included in
Appendices II and III are not refused entry due to the realities of
international supply chains that rely on ocean shipping. The United
States is undecided on whether to submit a discussion document to CoP20
proposing to update this guidance and will make a final decision based
on further review of available information, internal discussions, and
discussions with other Parties.
9. Trade in wood pellets: In joint comments submitted by the
Natural Resources Defense Council (NRDC), the Center for Biological
Diversity (CBD), and Defenders of Wildlife (Defenders), they urge the
United States to consider submitting a draft decision, resolution, or
agenda item seeking to examine international trade in wood pellets and
the tree species used in their production. NRDC, CBD, and Defenders
assert that the southeastern United States is the primary source for
trees converted to wood pellets and then exported to Europe and
elsewhere as renewable bioenergy. We are currently undecided on whether
to submit a document on this issue but will evaluate available
information and undertake additional internal discussions to determine
if the United States will submit a discussion document or agenda item
on this issue.
10. Identification of corals: CBD expresses concerns regarding the
ongoing challenges with documenting live coral and coral rock trade,
including identification challenges. CBD urges the United States to
propose continued consideration of this issue, including a potential
CITES workshop to develop additional identification resources and
reconsideration of Resolution Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP19) on Permits and
certificates. As a major importer of live corals, the United States
remains committed to ensuring trade in Appendix-II stony corals is
legal and biologically sustainable. The United States supports further
examination of issues surrounding trade of live stony corals. We are
currently undecided on whether to submit a document on this issue and
will consider it further pending outcomes and recommendations from the
SC78.
11. Trade suspension against Mexico and advocacy for the vaquita
(Phocoena sinus): Animal Welfare Institute (AWI), CBD, Environmental
Investigation Agency (EIA), and NRDC request that the United States
submit draft decision text for consideration at CoP20 to recommend a
trade suspension against Mexico for its ongoing failure to: (1) stop
the illegal trade in totoaba (Totoaba macdonaldi); (2) implement its
Compliance Action Plan on totoaba; or (3) take other measures as
directed by the Parties. The United States remains gravely concerned
about the status of the vaquita and illegal trade in totoaba. The
United States led efforts at the 19th meeting of the Conference of the
Parties (CoP19; Panama, November 2022) to strengthen several draft
decisions considered during CoP19 to combat the illegal harvest and
trade of totoaba. The Standing Committee will discuss this issue at its
next meeting. In light of the above, the United States is currently
undecided on whether to submit a document on the issue to CoP20. We
will make a decision on submitting a totoaba-related document to CoP20
pending outcomes and recommendations from SC78.
12. Law Enforcement Management Information System (LEMIS) database:
AWI encourages the United States to submit an information document for
consideration at CoP20 that provides an overview of the Service's Law
Enforcement Management Information System (LEMIS), to encourage other
Parties to consider implementing similar databases. AWI also suggests
that the United States consider hosting a side event at CoP20 to
discuss LEMIS.
The United States is a longtime active participant in the Standing
Committee's intersessional working group on Electronic Systems and
Information Technologies. This working group is the main conduit for
developing standards and best practices for electronic permit issuance
and enforcement and data reporting. Additionally, staff from the U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Law Enforcement, engage in
technical assistance activities with other Parties interested in
developing their own LEMIS-like processes for collecting legal and
illegal CITES trade data, as well as data on legal and illegal trade in
non-CITES species consistent with stricter domestic measures such as
the U.S. Endangered Species Act and Lacey Act. Each Party has a unique
set of circumstances regarding regulations and governance, and there is
no one-size-fits-all approach to data system development. That said, it
is possible for interested Parties to learn from the U.S. experience as
well as the experiences of other Parties that are also developing their
own data systems. The United States will consider whether a CoP20
information document on LEMIS or side event at CoP20 would be useful
for other Parties. In addition, we will explore the possibility of
coordinating with other Parties to present a more comprehensive view of
the options available for creating systems similar to LEMIS in
collecting and reporting data.
13. Transparency in the Secretariat's activities: The Species
Survival Network (SSN) observes that the Secretariat regularly notes
its increasing workload while also routinely proposing new analyses,
reports, and other work. To address this issue, SSN believes it is
important for Parties to have an opportunity to assess the proposed new
work against existing work and financial and personnel needs. SSN
encourages the United States to propose mechanisms to ensure greater
transparency in the Secretariat's activities, operations, and
priorities, including submitting a draft decision
[[Page 105083]]
requiring the adoption of terms of reference by the relevant committee
prior to hiring consultants. SSN also encourages the United States to
submit a draft decision directing the Secretariat to report to each
meeting on all outstanding commitments from existing Decisions and all
new work it proposes to undertake, along with estimated budget and
staff resources required.
The United States acknowledges the importance of transparency and
comprehensive decision making to the CITES processes. Although we are
currently undecided on submitting a document to CoP20 specifically
calling for the proposed changes, we strongly support the need for
ensuring transparency in the Secretariat's activities and operations,
including in its implementation of CITES Decisions. We believe that
this is particularly the case with regard to the development of terms
of reference and selection of consultants to carry out the mandates of
Decisions, which we believe are crucial for delivering meaningful
outputs that respond to the expectations of the CoP. Consequently,
although we are currently undecided, we may submit a discussion
document to CoP20 on this issue.
14. Disposal of confiscated specimens: SSN provides a list of what
it considers unresolved issues with Resolution Conf. 17.8 (Rev. CoP19)
on Disposal of illegally traded and confiscated specimens of CITES-
listed species and its annexes; and requests that the United States
consider submitting a working document to CoP20 to address those
issues. Specifically, SSN requests that the United States submit
amendments to the preambular language in Resolution Conf. 17.8 (Rev.
CoP19) along with changes to the Annexes to the Resolution to address
the need to prevent confiscated CITES-listed specimens, both living and
dead specimens or their parts that have been confiscated and returned
to their country of origin, from reentering trade; review the language
used in the Resolution that considers the advantages of euthanasia of a
confiscated specimen to ensure it is not used as a default option,
since it is inconsistent with Article VIII of the Convention; review
and revise the language pertaining to the placement of confiscated live
animals in research laboratories, as it is inconsistent with Article
VIII.4 and .5 of the Convention, since such facilities are not
established to ``look after the welfare of live animals, particularly
those that have been confiscated''; make appropriate revisions to the
decision tree analysis; and point to the need for greater guidance at
the point of confiscation, consideration of the disposal by experts,
and the development of a program to help with placing animals in the
most appropriate facility regardless of its location within or outside
the country of import.
With regard to the recommendation to revise Resolution Conf. 17.8
(Rev. CoP19), we are undecided at this time, pending the outcome of
discussions under Decision 19.174 on Disposal of confiscated specimens
at SC78. We continue to believe amendments to question 7 of the
decision tree analysis in the Resolution are necessary to ensure there
are no grounds for concern that any transfer of Appendix-I species will
stimulate further illegal or irregular trade or benefit those involved
in the illegal or irregular transaction that gave rise to confiscation.
We will carefully consider the outcomes at SC78 prior to determining
whether to submit a document for consideration at CoP20.
We are unlikely to review language on the advantages and
disadvantages of euthanasia because we believe it is consistent with
Article VIII of the Convention. We make determinations about the
disposal of confiscated specimens on a case-by-case basis, consistent
with the Resolution and U.S. regulations. The most important factor to
consider in the disposal of confiscated live specimens is the welfare
of the wildlife or plants. For live specimens, generally, the disposal
options are maintenance in captivity, return to the wild, or
euthanasia. In the absence of other options, euthanasia may be the most
humane or appropriate option. Although under Article VIII returning
confiscated live specimens to the country of export is one available
option, it is often not possible. Return to the wild of confiscated
specimens can carry risks for existing wild populations, such as
introduction of disease, and can result in the death of the specimens
released due to starvation, disease, or predation. Before considering
return to the wild, a country must decide if that action would make a
significant contribution to the conservation of the species or might be
harmful to the conservation of the species in the wild. In many
countries, including the United States, some confiscated specimens are
donated to sanctuaries, zoos, aquariums, or botanical gardens. This
option may not be available when a seizure involves a large number of
common species, as placement of specimens of lower conservation value
in limited space may benefit those individuals but may not support
conservation efforts as a whole. We are undecided on whether additional
guidance is needed in the Resolution for placement of confiscated live
specimens in research laboratories and would welcome additional
information on this matter.
15. Implementation of Introduction from the sea provisions: SSN
strongly encourages the United States to take action to ensure that
CITES continues to monitor and, where needed, actively enhance
implementation of provisions relating to Introduction from the Sea
(IFS). With new marine species included in the Appendices at each
meeting of the CoP since the 14th meeting of the Conference of the
Parties (CoP14, The Hague, June 2007), applying the practical guidance
included in Resolution Conf. 14.6 (Rev. CoP16) on Introduction from the
sea is becoming increasingly important for the conservation of these
species and to ensure effective implementation of the Convention.
Ensuring clear and consistent guidance on implementation of IFS in
accordance with the provisions of the Convention remains a key issue
for the United States, and several current Decisions are intended to
address challenges regarding implementation of IFS. We are undecided on
submitting a document on this issue. We will closely monitor the
outcomes and recommendations from SC78 and determine whether it will be
necessary to submit a document to CoP20 on this matter.
16. Implementation of CITES listings for sharks and rays: SSN
encourages the United States to consider what actions could be taken at
CoP20 to improve implementation of CITES listings for sharks and rays.
SSN urges the United States to consider submitting proposals to include
deepwater shark species in Appendix II and proposals to transfer
species that are critically endangered but for which trade is
continuing (e.g., oceanic whitetip (Carcharhinus longimanus) shark) to
Appendix I, and to be flexible for biologically vulnerable species that
fall outside of the range specified in the aquatic footnote when
considering any new listing proposals for sharks, rays, and other
relevant aquatic species. Please refer to the Recommendations for
Species Proposals for the United States To Consider Submitting for
CoP20 section of this notice on possible species proposals for
information on what the United States is likely, undecided, or unlikely
to propose at CoP20.
17. International trade in swim bladders: The United States is
concerned about the increasing demand in international trade for swim
bladders of teleost fish in the family Sciaenidae. The increased
harvest may be putting these species at risk of overexploitation
[[Page 105084]]
and is contributing to high rates of bycatch and associated mortality
of small marine mammals, sharks and rays, and marine turtles. The
United States is considering submitting a document to CoP20 to raise
awareness of this issue calling for appropriate actions to help ensure
that the international trade in these species does not jeopardize their
survival in the wild and put protected species that are incidentally
caught in target fisheries at further risk of extinction. However, we
require further consultations with Parties, and additional fish trade
or biological information/data regarding international trade, before
making a decision regarding this submission.
18. Personal and household effects: Based on internal discussions
and discussions with other range, transit, and consumer countries, the
United States may consider proposing or co-sponsoring an amendment to
Resolution Conf. 13.7 (Rev. CoP17) on Control of trade in personal and
household effects to amend the weight, volume, or number of specimens
of certain species to be included in the list in paragraph 3. b) iv)
for which the Parties have agreed that CITES documents are not required
unless the specimens being carried as a personal or household effect
exceeds the weight, volume, or number specified. Based on these
additional considerations, we may consider submitting an amendment to
the weight, volume, or number with regard to agarwood-producing species
that are currently included in the Resolution. We solicit information
on what may be appropriate quantities if we decide to submit or co-
sponsor such a proposal.
C. What resolutions, decisions, and agenda items is the United States
not likely to submit for consideration at CoP20, unless we receive
significant additional information?
1. CITES enforcement: Noting concerns regarding low penalties for
violations and other enforcement concerns, an individual recommends
that the United States increase funding and support to build the
capacity of Parties to implement CITES. We recognize the importance of
effective implementation of the provisions of the Convention, including
compliance and enforcement. The United States has long been a leader in
supporting CITES capacity-building and continues to be actively
involved in such support, and we are unlikely to submit a document on
this issue to CoP20.
2. Reservations under the Convention: A commenter believes that the
ability of a Party to take a reservation under CITES weakens the spirit
of the Convention and suggests that the United States seek to amend the
Convention text to phase out the ability of Parties to enter
reservations or create a requirement that reserving Parties provide
data demonstrating that trade in the reserving species is non-
detrimental. The Articles of the Convention are not open for amendment
at regular meetings of the Conference of the Parties, and therefore the
United States will not seek to amend the Convention text at CoP20.
Additionally, as noted in the Convention text, CITES is not subject
to general reservations and Parties have the ability to enter specific
reservations to amendments to the Appendices in accordance with the
provisions of Articles XV, XVI, and XXIII. In Resolution Conf. 4.25
(Rev. CoP19) on Reservations, the Parties have agreed to specific
guidance on the application of reservations, including a call for
Parties that have entered a reservation to maintain and communicate
information on trade in the species concerned in their CITES Annual
Reports. The United States has never taken a reservation under CITES,
and we strongly encourage other Parties to follow our consistent
practice in CITES to ensure effective international cooperation in the
conservation of species included in the Appendices. Nevertheless, there
are avenues to address specific concerns, and therefore we are unlikely
to pursue amending the current guidance at CoP20.
Additionally, as noted in the Convention text, CITES is not subject
to general reservations and Parties have the ability to enter specific
reservations to amendments to the Appendices in accordance with the
provisions of Articles XV, XVI, and XXIII. In Resolution Conf. 4.25
(Rev. CoP19) on Reservations, the Parties have agreed to specific
guidance on the application of reservations, including a call for
Parties that have entered a reservation to maintain and communicate
information on trade in the species concerned in their CITES Annual
Reports. The United States has never taken a reservation under CITES,
and we strongly encourage other Parties to follow our consistent
practice in CITES to ensure effective international cooperation in the
conservation of species included in the Appendices. Nevertheless, there
are avenues to address specific concerns, and therefore we are unlikely
to pursue amending the current guidance at CoP20.
3. Streamlining processes under CITES: The Association of Zoos &
Aquariums (AZA) recommends that any resolutions, decisions, or agenda
items that the United States submits for consideration at CoP20 focus
on streamlining processes to decrease burdens on Parties and the wait
time for permit processing, such as for activities that pose little or
no risk to wild populations. The United States has a long history of
working in CITES to streamline processes and enhance strategies for
effective implementation of the Convention, and we will continue to do
so. Additionally, the Parties are engaged in ongoing discussions on
facilitating the efficient international movement of wildlife samples
for diagnostic purposes and/or conservation purposes and the non-
commercial movement of musical instruments for purposes of performance,
display, or competition. In light of the above, the United States is
unlikely to submit a document on the issue to CoP20.
4. CITES implementation: AZA recommends that the United States
develop implementation plans for any new CITES listings or increased
regulatory controls and share these plans before CoP20 so that the
decisions taken at CoP20 include assurances of effective
implementation, and that the Service include associated funding
requirements in its FY 2026 budget request. The Service, as the U.S.
CITES Management and Scientific Authority, will continue to work with
the relevant U.S. Government entities and stakeholders, as appropriate,
to ensure effective implementation and enforcement of new listings and
associated regulatory controls to facilitate legal, traceable, and
biologically sustainable trade in CITES-listed species.
5. Illicit financial flows: WWF believes that a resolution on
illicit financial flows arising from trade in contravention of CITES
would complement and reinforce Resolution Conf. 17.6 (Rev. CoP19) on
Prohibiting, preventing, detecting and countering corruption, which
facilitates activities conducted in violation of the Convention. These
issues are already considered in the context of existing Resolutions
including Resolution Conf. 11.3 (Rev. CoP19) on Compliance and
enforcement and Resolution Conf. 17.6 (Rev. CoP19). Therefore, we are
unlikely to propose a new resolution on this issue to CoP20; however,
we will continue to look for opportunities to ensure effective
implementation of these Resolutions.
6. Traceability: WWF recommends that the United States introduce an
agenda topic on the adoption of a resolution on traceability. WWF
thinks that the current definition and guidance as adopted by CITES is
not sufficient and more species need traceability
[[Page 105085]]
systems. WWF believes that there is a need for a stronger emphasis on
the use of traceability for products from CITES-listed species that
would best be served through the adoption of a resolution on
traceability. WWF cites studies that have looked at the use of
traceability for CITES-listed species and increasingly specific
taxonomic groups included in the Appendices, such as sharks and rays,
which have been identified through the Standing and Animals Committees'
processes as potential candidates that could benefit from use of
traceability.
The United States appreciates WWF's recommendation to introduce a
draft resolution on traceability. At the 17th meeting of the Conference
of the Parties (CoP17; Johannesburg, September/October 2016), the
Parties adopted a working definition for traceability and guidance on
its application, which is available to Parties on the CITES website
with links to the associated documents. The 70th meeting of the
Standing Committee (SC70; Sochi, October 2018) and the 18th meeting of
the Conference of the Parties (CoP18; Geneva, August 2019) considered
whether a resolution on traceability should be drafted and decided it
was not warranted at that time. We continue to support those
conclusions and are not convinced that a resolution is needed at this
time. Therefore, we are unlikely to submit one to CoP20 unless
additional information becomes available that warrants reassessing this
issue.
7. Immortal cell lines, genome libraries, and trace DNA samples:
Citing the importance of immortal cell lines, genome libraries, and
trace DNA for conservation genetics and wildlife forensics, and the
length of time and cost associated with obtaining CITES documents, two
individuals recommend that the United States submit a proposal to CoP20
to amend Resolution Conf. 9.6 (Rev. CoP19) on Trade in readily
recognizable parts and derivatives, to exclude them from CITES
requirements.
With regard to immortal cell lines and genome libraries, the
individuals contend that they do not have ``any template of the
organism from which they are derived . . . and are considered as
synthetic DNA, eligible for exclusion under CITES.'' With regard to
trace DNA, the individuals argue that amounts of 50 micrograms or less
have no anticipated financial value and, therefore, should be excluded
from CITES requirements.
We note that the Parties in Resolution Conf. 9.6 (Rev. CoP19) have
agreed that ``the term `readily recognizable part or derivative,' as
used in the Convention, is interpreted to include any specimen that
appears from an accompanying document, the packaging or a mark or
label, or from any other circumstances, to be a part or derivative of
an animal or plant of a species included in the Appendices.'' As
defined by the commenters, immortal cells, genome libraries, and trace
DNA all meet the current CITES definition of a readily recognizable
part or derivative.
We note that the potential financial value of specimens of CITES-
listed species is not the determining factor for regulating
international trade in the species. Also, recognizing that the trade in
many biological samples, because of their special nature or because of
the special purpose of such trade, requires expedited processing of
permits and certificates to allow for the timely movement of shipments,
the Parties have adopted simplified procedures to issue permits and
certificates for such samples, subject to certain requirements (see
Resolution Conf. 12.3 (Rev. CoP19) on Permits and certificates).
Additionally, the Parties are engaged in ongoing discussions to examine
the development of additional mechanisms to facilitate the efficient
international movement of wildlife samples for diagnostic and/or
conservation purposes. In light of the above, the United States is
unlikely to submit a proposed amendment to Resolution Conf. 9.6 (Rev.
CoP19) to CoP20.
8. Elephant taxonomy: IFAW recommends that the United States
consider the taxonomy of the African elephant and that any change to
the current listing for the African elephant in the Appendices should
list them as Loxodonta spp. and that such a change would not alter the
scope of the current species listing. As IFAW notes, this issue is the
subject of current intersessional discussions by the Animals Committee
and the Standing Committee. At AC33, the Animals Committee accepted the
new taxonomy for African elephants and referred use of Loxodonta spp.
for consideration at SC78. We support the conclusions of the Animals
Committee and will develop positions consistent with that approach for
SC78 and CoP20, and therefore, we are unlikely to submit a document to
CoP20 on this issue.
9. Recognizing the role of rangers in CITES implementation: IFAW
recommends that the United States submit a standalone resolution, or
amendments to Resolution Conf. 10.4 (Rev. CoP14) on Cooperation and
synergy with the Convention on Biological Diversity or Resolution Conf.
11.3 (Rev. CoP19) on Compliance and enforcement to recognize the
fundamental importance of rangers to CITES implementation.
The United States recognizes the importance of enforcement
officers, including rangers, in the effective implementation and
enforcement of CITES. However, we are unlikely to submit a document on
this subject to CoP20. We will continue to seek opportunities to
support the recognition, protection, and support of rangers and other
enforcement officers.
10. Annotations for CITES-listed tree species: The League of
American Orchestras (LAO) reiterates its longstanding concerns that the
imposition of CITES requirements on the transboundary movement of
musical instruments (for performance and resale) has hindered trade and
cultural activity with little associated conservation value. As the
discussions proceed, particularly in the Standing Committee, LAO
emphasizes the need for the CITES controls to apply where they have the
greatest conservation value. The United States has been involved in,
and led, the annotations- related discussions in CITES and will
continue to be actively involved in such discussions, including in
stressing the need to apply the guidance adopted by the Parties in
Resolution Conf. 11.21 (Rev. CoP19) on Use of annotations in Appendices
I and II, including that the conservation impact of excluding certain
specimens from CITES provisions and the enforceability of the
annotation should be considered, that controls should concentrate on
those commodities that first appear in international trade as exports
from range States, and that controls should include those commodities
that dominate the trade from the wild. Given the ongoing discussions,
we do not see a need to submit a discussion document on this matter to
CoP20.
11. Travel with instruments containing CITES-listed species: LAO,
on behalf of multiple musical instrument stakeholders, requests that
Parties consider recommendations for efficiencies for transportation
and commerce of musical instruments containing CITES-listed species
from the Standing Committee's working group on rapid movement of
wildlife diagnostic samples and of musical instruments. They also
request that Parties undertake consideration of permit exemptions for
musical instruments transported by cargo under an ATA carnet. The
United States is a member of the working group on rapid movement of
wildlife diagnostic samples and of musical instruments and is actively
engaged in discussions to consider additional efficiencies, in
[[Page 105086]]
accordance with the requirements of the Convention, for non-commercial
movement of musical instruments containing CITES-listed species. We are
unlikely to submit a recommendation for permit exemptions for musical
instruments as we cannot propose or support the adoption of a new
exemption from CITES requirements that does not exist under the
Convention. We will continue to work with the Parties, musicians, and
other stakeholders in an effort to ensure that Parties utilize the
existing efficiencies.
12. Engagement of Indigenous Peoples as well as local communities:
Jamma International, on behalf of the Community Leaders Network and
Resource Africa, expresses its support for a proposal to establish a
technical advisory body to continue the work of the Standing
Committee's intersessional working groups on livelihoods and engagement
of Indigenous Peoples. They wish for a technical advisory body to
discuss opportunities, including formation of an informal Indigenous
Peoples as well as local communities caucus; funding sources to cover
range country costs of national-level consultation with Indigenous
Peoples as well as local communities; improved registration processes
or recognition of a separate Indigenous Peoples as well as local
communities observer category for CITES meetings; and other
international level engagement mechanisms. They urge the United States
to support continuation of the working group at SC78 and through CoP20.
The United States is a member of the intersessional working group
and will continue to actively engage in its work. We acknowledge that
achieving the conservation aim of CITES can result in important
positive benefits to Indigenous Peoples as well as local communities,
while on the other hand illegal trade and unsustainable use that CITES
is designed to prevent can have serious negative consequences for
Indigenous Peoples as well as local communities. The United States
believes that effective engagement of Indigenous Peoples as well as
local communities in CITES decision making is critical to the
successful implementation of CITES decisions. However, we believe that
Parties should engage Indigenous Peoples as well as local communities
in their national processes via the consultative processes already
provided in existing CITES Resolutions, with the addition of
supportive, non-binding guidance that is being developed through
current CITES Decisions. We maintain that it is up to Parties as to
whether and how their national Indigenous Peoples as well as local
communities would be included in international meetings, including as
delegation members of those Parties, consistent with Resolution Conf.
16.6 (Rev. CoP18) on CITES and livelihoods.
Considering the workload and financial impact to Parties and the
Secretariat, we do not support the establishment of another permanent
committee. We will continue to engage in discussions in the working
group but do not support a separate Indigenous Peoples as well as local
communities registration category within the CITES process, as it is
not in line with text of the Convention and would put additional
burdens on the Secretariat. We are open to other ideas to engage
Indigenous Peoples as well as local communities in CITES, and we have
expressed that perspective in the intersessional working group.
13. Emergency listing mechanism: CBD recommends that the United
States submit a working document proposing amendments to the CoP Rules
of Procedure or a draft resolution to consider proposals to amend
Appendix I or Appendix II on an emergency basis outside of meetings of
the CoP. Article XV of the Convention provides for a postal procedure
to consider proposed amendments to Appendix I or II between meetings of
the CoP. In accordance with Article XVI, any Party may at any time
include in Appendix III a species that it identifies as being subject
to regulation within its jurisdiction for the purpose of preventing or
restricting exploitation, and as needing the cooperation of other
Parties in the control of trade (see also Resolution Conf. 9.25
(Rev.CoP18 on Implementation of the Convention for species in Appendix
III)). Considering the mechanisms in the Convention, the United States
is unlikely to submit to CoP20 proposed amendments to the CoP Rules of
Procedure or a draft resolution on this issue.
14. Marine ornamental fishes: Given the high volume of specimens
and species in international trade and the risk that trade presents to
some species, CBD recommends that the United States propose a draft
decision to continue the discussions on trade in marine ornamental
fishes during the next intersessional period. The United States has
long played a leadership role in considering international trade in
marine ornamental fishes and continues to be actively involved in the
discussions. We support the recommendations of the workshop on marine
ornamental fishes that took place in May 2024, as well as the outcomes
from AC33. We note that the Animals Committee agreed to propose draft
decisions to CoP20 to continue the work during the next intersessional
period, including encouraging Parties to develop methods or analytical
tools to support prioritization of marine ornamental fishes that may
warrant further research or other considerations. Given this
information, the United States is unlikely to submit a document on this
issue to CoP20.
15. Sea cucumbers: CBD recommends that the United States propose a
draft decision on sea cucumber trade that would call for convening a
second global workshop to consider the status, conservation, and
management of sea cucumbers globally. We are unlikely to submit a draft
decision calling for additional work, subject to external funding, for
which we do not currently envision having funding to support.
Therefore, we are unlikely to submit a draft decision on this issue.
Nevertheless, consistent with our efforts to ensure that international
trade in sea cucumbers is legal and biologically sustainable, we are
considering several species of sea cucumbers found in the Caribbean to
assess their conservation status and determine whether international
trade could pose a threat to their survival in the wild and therefore
warrant potential inclusion in the Appendices.
16. Compliance matters: CBD recommends that the United States seek
to improve CITES compliance mechanisms by making clear that Technical
Advisory Groups (TAGs) can and should be used in the process to provide
technical knowledge and ensure transparency and accountability. The
United States notes that the CITES compliance procedures outlined in
Resolution Conf. 14.3 (Rev. CoP19) on CITES compliance procedures
already provide an avenue for undertaking necessary consultations,
including with outside experts as appropriate, and accountability and
transparency are key parts of the existing processes. Therefore, the
United States is unlikely to take action related to this
recommendation.
17. Global trade in swim bladders: AWI encourages the United States
to submit a draft resolution on the global trade in swim bladders of
croaker species (Sciaenidae spp.) for consideration at CoP20. The
United States is unlikely to submit a draft resolution on the global
trade in croaker swim bladders to CoP20, as most croaker species are
not included in the Appendices. It would be more appropriate and
effective for species conservation, where the CITES listing criteria
are met, to propose species of
[[Page 105087]]
concern for inclusion in the Appendices to ensure international trade
is legal, traceable, and biologically sustainable. As noted in the
previous section, based on internal discussions, the United States is
considering submitting a document to CoP20 to raise awareness regarding
the international trade in swim bladders and calling for appropriate
actions to help ensure that the international trade in the species does
not jeopardize their survival in the wild and put protected species
that are incidentally caught in target fisheries at further risk of
extinction.
18. Confiscations and welfare: With reference to Resolution Conf.
17.8 (Rev. CoP19) on Disposal of confiscated specimens of CITES-listed
species, AWI encourages the United States to: (1) consider submitting a
working document to CoP20 directing the Secretariat, subject to the
availability of external funding, to prepare a report examining how
animal welfare issues are currently addressed under the Convention and
its implementation, and to identify how CITES could integrate
additional welfare considerations into its implementation; (2) submit
revisions to Resolution Conf. 17.8 (Rev. CoP19) to ensure that the
Resolution text is consistent with the intent of the Convention, and to
incorporate an animal welfare ethic into the treatment of any seized/
confiscated specimens; and (3) join other Parties in opposing ex-situ
trade in live, wild-caught African and Asian elephants with limited
exceptions.
With regard to the recommendation to update Resolution Conf. 17.8
(Rev. CoP19), we are unlikely to recommend them at this time but will
make a final decision based on additional discussions and pending the
outcome of discussions at SC78. Consistent with the guidance in
Resolution Conf. 17.8 (Rev. CoP19), the most important factor we
consider in the disposal of confiscated living specimens is the welfare
of the wildlife or plants, and we make such determinations on a case-
by-case basis, consistent with the Resolution and our regulations.
Additional work on transport of live specimens is already taking place
under several Decisions, including to ensure that Parties have the
resources and guidance necessary to implement and enforce the
Convention's requirements (Articles III, IV, V, and VII) that ``any
living specimens are so prepared and shipped'' and ``transported and
cared for as to minimize the risk of injury, damage to health or cruel
treatment'' and further requirements (Article VIII) that ``all living
specimens, during any period of transit, holding or shipment, are
properly cared for so as to minimize the risk of injury, damage to
health or cruel treatment.'' Therefore, we are unlikely to submit a
document directed at the suggested revisions. We are also unlikely to
submit a document on trade in live elephants, as current Decisions and
ongoing discussions are already considering these issues.
19. Compliance measures: AWI encourages the United States to make
clear that the compliance procedures set out in Article XIII are not
only triggered when the provisions of the Convention are violated but
also when a species included in Appendix I or II is being affected
adversely by trade. AWI argues that such overly limited interpretations
will substantively weaken the impact of CITES. AWI also encourages the
United States to advocate for compliance processes to be applied
equally to transit and consumer countries, in addition to range
countries. We agree regarding the importance of ensuring compliance
with CITES requirements and believe that sufficient mechanisms already
exist to consider and take appropriate actions when trade is determined
to be adversely affecting species included in Appendix I or II and when
transit and consumer States fail to comply with the provisions of the
Convention. Therefore, we are unlikely to submit a discussion document
or agenda item to CoP20 on these issues.
20. Potential submissions and implementation costs: Safari Club
International (SCI) encourages the United States to submit no new
resolutions, decisions, agenda items, or species proposals for
consideration at CoP20 without careful consideration for costs and how
effective each proposal would be at achieving the desired outcomes. We
remain cognizant of workload and resource issues and strive to use
existing measures, where applicable. The United States will carefully
consider each resolution, decision, or agenda item, including whether
they could be effectively implemented. Additionally, the United States
works closely with States, Native American Tribes, and other national
stakeholders, to ensure that species are appropriately included in the
Appendices. We also consult range countries for foreign species, and
for species whose range the United States shares with one or more other
countries.
The United States also remains concerned regarding the funding and
prioritization of core CITES work and will continue to work through the
Standing Committee's Finance and Budget Subcommittee and the CoP to
address these issues. Currently, we do not intend to submit draft
decisions on this matter to CoP20.
21. Funding for CITES implementation and enforcement: Noting the
proliferation of new work streams under CITES while longstanding and
operational work remains incomplete, SSN encourages the United States
to ensure that programmatic work subject to external funding is
prioritized in line with the core mandate of CITES rather than to
reflect national or organizational interests. SSN also suggests that
the United States consider proposing a process to ensure that the
status of current priorities is evaluated and regularly shared,
especially prior to a meeting of the Conference of the Parties, to
enable Parties to assess the relative financial costs of the adoption
of new work streams and/or the continuation of others. The United
States remains concerned regarding the funding and prioritization of
core CITES work and will determine, based on further internal
discussions, additional opportunities to influence such discussions.
22. Funding for meetings of the CoP: Noting the importance of
ensuring that meetings of the CoP are held in different regions and the
financial constraints with being able to do that, SSN urges the United
States to submit a draft decision to CoP20 directing the Secretariat
and the Standing Committee's Finance and Budget Subcommittee to explore
funding mechanisms with the aim of guaranteeing that future CoPs will
not have to be postponed or withdrawn for financial reasons. The United
States shares SSN's concerns and is actively engaged in discussions
with the Secretariat and in the work of the Subcommittee to consider
funding for CoPs and other key CITES activities. Because these
considerations are already included in the ongoing discussions, the
United States is unlikely to submit the suggested draft decisions.
23. Leopards: SSN requests the United States to consider further
review of, or amendments to, Resolution Conf. 10.14 (Rev. CoP19) on
Quotas for leopard hunting trophies and skins for personal use, aimed
at strengthening the scientific oversight of annual leopard quotas and
reducing overexploitation of the species. Panthera also recommends
review of Resolution Conf. 10.14 (Rev. CoP19) and suggested that
amendments may be needed to ensure that exports and imports of
specimens will not be detrimental to the survival of the species, in
particular amendments requiring the Animals Committee to
[[Page 105088]]
review the approach of leopard trophy hunting quotas established by the
CoP and non-detriment finding reports, as well as reducing the mandated
interval for review of quotas as called for in Resolution Conf. 9.21
(Rev. CoP18) on Interpretation and application of quotas for species
included in Appendix I.
Each of the current quotas for leopards from range countries were
reviewed by the Animals Committee at its 30th or 31st meeting (AC30:
Geneva 2018; AC31: online 2021). Decisions were taken and each of the
export quotas were approved at either CoP18 (Geneva 2019) or CoP19
(Panama 2022). At AC33, the Animals Committee agreed to propose draft
decisions for consideration at CoP20 that concern consolidating and
sharing information related to the management and monitoring of leopard
and hunting quotas that assist Parties in making non-detriment findings
for trade in leopard hunting trophies in accordance with Resolution
Conf. 10.14 (Rev. CoP19). Therefore, we are unlikely to propose
amendments to Resolution Conf. 10.14 (Rev. CoP19) to CoP20.
24. Trade and conservation in Old World porcupines: SSN recommends
that the United States submit a working document on the trade and
conservation of Old World porcupines (Hystricidae) with accompanying
draft decisions instructing the Secretariat to commission a study on
the scale and scope of the trade in the species, current knowledge on
status of the species, management by range countries, status of
captive-sourced production, and also including recommendations
regarding the conservation and management of the species, including
through possible actions under CITES. In light of existing workloads
and priorities, the United States is unlikely to submit a document on
this issue. However, we will carefully consider any proposals or
discussion documents submitted to CoP20 on trade in these species, and
we will develop our position based on available information, internal
discussions, and public input.
25. International trade in frogs for consumption: SSN urges the
United States to submit a working document to CoP20 calling for a study
on the international trade in frogs, including frogs' legs, for human
consumption, in order to identify actions that CITES might take to
ensure that this trade is not detrimental to the survival of wild
populations of frogs. During the current intersessional period, the
Secretariat, the Parties, and the Animals Committee have undertaken
work in accordance with Decisions 19.197 to 19.199 on Conservation of
amphibians (Amphibia spp.). In response to the work undertaken to date
on this issue, including in consideration of the outcomes from the
CITES Online workshops on conservation of amphibians (Amphibia spp.)
(November/December 2023), the Animals Committee at AC33 agreed to
submit draft decisions to CoP20 to undertake additional work on the
conservation of and trade in amphibians during the next intersessional
period. Therefore, the United States is unlikely to submit a document
to CoP20 on this issue.
Request for Information and Comments
We invite information and comments concerning any of the possible
CoP20 species proposals, resolutions, decisions, and agenda items
discussed above. Please note that we are unlikely to submit any
suggested species proposals to amend the Appendices that contained no
information (or minimal information) for consideration other than
species name and Appendix suggestion. We have limited resources with
which to analyze and prepare potential species proposals for
consideration by the Conference of the Parties to CITES and are unable
to prioritize consideration of these recommendations for preparation of
U.S. proposals to CoP20 where no information (or minimal information)
has been presented demonstrating the CITES criteria are met for the
suggested species proposal. We may still consider these possible
proposals if we receive information demonstrating the CITES criteria in
Resolution Conf. 9.24 are met.
We note that in our request for information in our first Federal
Register notice for CoP20 (89 FR 20489; March 22, 2024), we encouraged
the submission of information on possible species proposals, including
if these species are subject to international trade that is, or may
become, detrimental to the survival of the species. We outlined the
information that should be submitted, and we included information on
the CITES criteria for inclusion of species in Appendices I and II and
the format for proposals to amend the Appendices (in Resolution Conf.
9.24 (Rev. CoP17) https://cites.org/sites/default/files/document/E-Res-09-24-R17.pdf). We also asked that commenters submit convincing
information describing: (1) The status of the species, especially trend
information; (2) conservation and management programs for the species,
including the effectiveness of enforcement efforts; and (3) the level
of international trade as well as domestic trade in the species,
especially trend information.
Public Availability of Comments
You must submit your information and comments to us no later than
the date specified in DATES, above, to ensure that we consider them. We
will not consider comments sent by email or fax, or to an address not
listed in ADDRESSES.
Comments and materials received will be posted for public
inspection on https://www.regulations.gov (see ADDRESSES). Our practice
is to post all comments, including names and addresses of respondents,
and to make comments, including names and home addresses of
respondents, available for public review. There may be circumstances in
which we would withhold from public review a respondent's name and/or
address, as allowable by law. If you wish for us to withhold your name
and/or address, you must state this prominently at the beginning of
your comment, but we cannot guarantee that we will be able to do so. We
will make all comments and materials submitted by organizations or
businesses, and by individuals identifying themselves as
representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, available
for public inspection in their entirety.
Observers
Article XI, paragraph 7, of CITES states that ``any body or agency
technically qualified in protection, conservation or management of wild
fauna and flora, in the following categories, which has informed the
Secretariat of its desire to be represented at meetings of the
Conference by observers, shall be admitted unless at least one-third of
the Parties present object:
(a) international agencies or bodies, either governmental or non-
governmental, and national governmental agencies and bodies; and
(b) national non-governmental agencies or bodies which have been
approved for this purpose by the State in which they are located. Once
admitted, these observers shall have the right to participate but not
to vote.''
Persons wishing to be observers representing international
nongovernmental organizations (which must have offices in more than one
country) at CoP20 may request approval directly from the Secretariat.
Persons wishing to be observers representing U.S. national
nongovernmental organizations at CoP20 must receive prior approval from
the U.S. Division of Management Authority (ADDRESSES).
[[Page 105089]]
Once we grant our approval, a U.S. national nongovernmental
organization is eligible to register with the Secretariat and must do
so at least 6 weeks prior to the opening of CoP20 to participate in the
meeting as an observer. Individuals who are not affiliated with an
organization may not register as observers. An international
nongovernmental organization with at least one office in the United
States may register as a U.S. nongovernmental organization if it
prefers.
An organization seeking approval from our office to attend CoP20 as
an observer must include in their request evidence of their technical
qualifications in protection, conservation, or management of wild fauna
or flora, for both the organization and the individual
representative(s). The request must also include copies of the
organization's charter and any bylaws, and a list of representatives it
intends to send to CoP20.
Organizations seeking approval for the first time should detail
their experience in the protection, conservation, or management of wild
fauna or flora, as well as their purposes for wishing to participate in
CoP20 as an observer. An organization that we have approved within the
past 5 years as an observer to a meeting of the Conference of the
Parties does not need to provide as much detailed information
concerning its qualifications as an organization seeking approval for
the first time. Requests should be sent to the Division of Management
Authority at the address provided in ADDRESSES, above; via email to
[email protected]; or via fax to 703-358-2276.
Once we approve an organization as an observer, we will direct them
to the location on the CITES website where they can obtain instructions
for registering with the Secretariat and obtain logistical information
about the meeting. A list of organizations approved for observer status
at CoP20 will be available upon request from the Division of Management
Authority immediately prior to the start of CoP20.
Future Actions
The Secretariat will prepare a provisional agenda for CoP20
following the submission of documents for the meeting. We will publish
the CoP20 provisional agenda in the Federal Register and on our website
at https://www.fws.gov/international-affairs/cites/cop20.
The United States must submit any proposals to amend Appendix I or
II and any draft resolutions, decisions, or agenda items for discussion
at CoP20 to the Secretariat at least 150 days (i.e., by June 27, 2025)
prior to the start of the meeting. In order to meet this deadline and
to prepare for CoP20, we have developed a tentative U.S. schedule. We
will consider all available information and comments we receive during
the comment period for this Federal Register notice as we decide which
species proposal items warrant submission by the United States for
consideration by the Parties. Approximately 4 months prior to CoP20, we
will post on our website an announcement of the species proposals,
draft resolutions, draft decisions, and agenda items submitted by the
United States to the Secretariat for consideration at CoP20.
Through additional notices and website postings in advance of
CoP20, we will inform you about preliminary negotiating positions on
resolutions, decisions, and proposals to amend the Appendices proposed
by other Parties for consideration at CoP20. We will also publish an
announcement of a public meeting to be held approximately 2 to 3 months
prior to CoP20, to receive public input on our positions regarding
CoP20 issues. The procedures for developing U.S. documents and
negotiating positions for a meeting of the Conference of the Parties to
CITES are outlined in 50 CFR 23.87. As noted in paragraph (c) of that
section, we may modify or suspend the procedures outlined there if they
would interfere with the timely or appropriate development of documents
for submission to the CoP and of U.S. negotiating positions.
Authors
The primary authors of this notice are Thomas E.J. Leuteritz,
Ph.D., Branch Chief, Division of Scientific Authority, and Anne St.
John, Biologist, Division of Management Authority, U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service.
Authority
The authority for this action is the Endangered Species Act of
1973, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.).
Martha Williams,
Director, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.
[FR Doc. 2024-30698 Filed 12-23-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4333-15-P