CITES Secretariat recommends rejection of thresher shark and Ocellate river stingray proposals
Proposals for amendment of Appendices I and II
Seventeenth meeting of the Conference of the Parties
Johannesburg (South Africa), 24 September – 5 October 2016
— — — — —
Official list (only related to sharks and rays) and recommendations by the CITES Secretariat :
Species covered by the Proposal:
Carcharhinus falciformis (Silky shark)
Proposal number and Proponents:
CoP17 Prop. 42
Bahamas, Bangladesh, Benin, Brazil, Burkina Faso, the Comoros, the Dominican Republic, Egypt, the European Union, Fiji, Gabon, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Maldives, Mauritania, Palau, Panama, Samoa, Senegal, Sri Lanka and Ukraine
Proposal:
Include Silky shark Carcharhinus falciformis in Appendix II
Recommendation by the Secretariat:
Based on the available information it is unclear whether Carcharhinus falciformis meets the criteria in Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP16), Annex 2 a criterion A, for its inclusion in Appendix II when read in conjunction with the footnote with respect to the application of decline for commercially exploited aquatic species in Annex 5. However, the Conference of the Parties, through Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP16), resolved that Parties by virtue of the precautionary approach and in case of uncertainty regarding the status of a species or the impact of trade on the conservation of a species, shall act in the best interest of the conservation of the species concerned, and the Secretariat recommends taking a precautionary approach.
The Secretariat recommends that this proposal be adopted.
——–
Species covered by the Proposal:
Alopias spp. (Thresher sharks)
Proposal number and Proponents:
CoP17 Prop. 43
Bahamas, Bangladesh, Benin, Brazil, Burkina Faso, the Comoros, the Dominican Republic, Egypt, the European Union, Fiji, Gabon, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Kenya, Maldives, Mauritania, Palau, Panama, Samoa, Senegal, Seychelles, Sri Lanka and Ukraine
Proposal:
Include the genus Alopias spp. in Appendix II
Recommendation by the Secretariat:
Based on the information available at the time of writing, Alopias superciliosus does not meet criterion A of Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP16), Annex 2 a for its inclusion in Appendix II. The supporting statement does not refer to criterion B. If Alopias superciliosus were to be included in Appendix II, A. vulpinus and A. pelagicus would meet the criteria in Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP16), Annex 2 b criterion A, for their inclusion in Appendix II in accordance with Article II, paragraph 2 (b) of the Convention (look-alike). The Conference of the Parties, through Resolution 9.24 (Rev. CoP16), may consider the precautionary approach and in case of uncertainty regarding the status of a species or the impact of trade on the conservation of a species, shall act in the best interest of the conservation of the species concerned.
The Secretariat recommends that this proposal be rejected (as the species do not meet criterion A of Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP16), Annex 2 a.
Note to Parties
Important new information on the status of Alopias spp. has become available since the submission of Proposal 43. Taking this into account, the proponents may consider if it would be appropriate to submit an updated proposal at the next meeting of the Conference of the Parties and whether the species might meet criterion B.
——
Species covered by the Proposal:
Mobula spp. (Devil rays)
Proposal number and Proponents:
CoP17 Prop. 44
Bahamas, Bangladesh, Benin, Brazil, Burkina Faso, the Comoros, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Egypt, the European Union, Fiji, Ghana, Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Maldives, Mauritania, Palau, Panama, Samoa, Senegal, Seychelles, Sri Lanka and the United States of America
Propsal:
Include the genus Mobula spp. in Appendix II
Recommendation by the Secretariat:
Based on the available information at the time of writing, Mobula japanica and M. tarapacana meet the criterion A of Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP16), Annex 2 a, read in conjunction with the footnote with respect to the application of decline for commercially exploited aquatic species in Annex 5, for inclusion in Appendix II in accordance with Article II, paragraph 2 (a) of the Convention. The other seven species of Mobula spp. meet criterion A of Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP16), Annex 2 b in accordance with Article II, paragraph 2 (b) of the Convention.
The Secretariat recommends that this proposal be adopted.
——–
Species covered by the Proposal:
Potamotrygon motoro (Ocellate river stingray)
Proposal number and Proponents:
CoP17 Prop. 45
Bolivia (Plurinational State of)
Proposal:
Include Ocellate river stingray Potamotrygon motoro in Appendix II
Recommendation by the Secretariat:
Based on the available information at the time of writing, Potamotrygon motoro does not meet the criterion A of Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP16), Annex 2 a for inclusion in Appendix II in accordance with Article II, paragraph 2 (a) of the Convention.
The Secretariat recommends that this proposal be rejected.
Note to Parties
The Secretariat wishes to draw the Parties’ attention to the report of the Freshwater Stingray Expert workshop that took place October 2014 in Colombia and that is available as Annex 1 of document CoP17 Doc. 87. The Animals Committee subsequently recommended all range States to include all species of concern, including Potamotrygon motoro, in Appendix III, as reflected in draft decision 17.BB contained in document CoP17 Doc. 87.
Source: Recommendations to the 182 Parties to CITES
–