2. LEGAL CONSIDERATIONS

2.1. International Compliance and Law Enforcement (Dietrich Jelden)

One of the driving forces behind the international community to decide to establish the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) was to protect threatened species including all crocodilians from unregulated, unsustainable and illegal trade. Therefore all crocodilians were listed on the Appendices of CITES, on either Appendix I and/or Appendix II when the Convention was adopted on 3 March 1973. Even after CITES was enacted, many crocodilian species remained seriously affected by unregulated illegal trade which to some extent still takes place nowadays, however, in other ways and dimensions relative those prior to CITES effect. Irrespective of that illicit trade over the long-term, CITES had an extremely positive effect on the recovery of many crocodilian populations.

Globally, the relatively low priority of wildlife crime among law enforcement agencies, and the comparative paucity of resources dedicated to tracking and punishing such trade, make wildlife crime a high-profit and low risk means of income (Akella and Allen 2012). Over the years CITES has tried to meet these challenges and developed certain tools or processes or assisted to create new specialized enforcement bodies in order to better implement as one of very few multilateral environmental agreements. Its 'sanction' system allows for recommendations to suspend trade between a certain non-compliant Party and all CITES Parties. Because of non-compliance with CITES provisions currently a recommendation to suspend trade in crocodilian parts and derivatives originating from Madagascar has been put into place (via Notification to the Parties 2010/015 of 17.6.2010). Wijnstekers (2011: pp. 237-260) details since 1975, when the Convention entered into force, the evolution of CITES Compliance and Enforcement procedures and the creation of certain bodies such as the International Consortium on Combating Wildlife Crime (ICCWC), which is a collaborative effort by 5 intergovernmental organizations to bring coordinated support to national wildlife law enforcement agencies and to the sub regional and regional networks that, on a daily basis, act in defense of natural resources.

The legal basis for enforcement and compliance is embedded in the text of the Convention. Article VIII provides for what legal measures must be taken by the Parties. More specifications have been discussed by the Parties when Resolution Conf. 8.4 (Rev. CoP15) on 'National laws for the implementation of the Convention' was adopted. Parties having not adopted measures for effective implementation of the Convention such as designation of authorities, prohibition of trade in specimens in violation of the Convention, establishment of national provisions for penalization or confiscation when specimens are illegally traded can be confronted with a recommendation by the CITES Standing Committee to suspend trade.

Article XIII of the Convention lays down procedures to be initiated by the CITES Secretariat for what needs to be done if a Party is not in compliance with the provisions of the Convention. More specifics of how to implement these provisions have been discussed since the 2nd Conference of the Parties (CoP2) and several other CoPs. The up-to-date specifications that have been discussed and consolidated at the CoP11 are now embedded in Resolution Conf. 11.3 (Rev. CoP15) on 'Compliance and Enforcement'. However, this resolution goes much further as, for example, it provides a mandate for the Secretariat for other enforcement activities or requests from Parties to adapt their enforcement activities more specifically.

If a Party is confronted with a compliance problem that has been brought to the attention of the international community, and in order to handle such cases in a uniform and transparent manner, CITES has adopted Resolution Conf. 14.3 on 'CITES compliance procedures', providing some guidance whose primary objective is to facilitate and achieve compliance with the obligations of the Convention, and assisting Parties to meet their obligations regarding such compliance.

References

Akella, A.S. and Allen, C. (2012). Dismantling Wildlife Crime: Executive Summary. TRAFFIC Report, Cambridge; UK. (http://www.traffic.org/home/2012/11/14/fuller-symposium-focuses-on-wildlife-crime.html).

Anon (2007). 'CITES compliance procedures'. CITES Resolution Conf. 14.3. CITES Secretariat: Geneva.

Anon (2010). 'National laws for the implementation of the Convention'. CITES Resolution Conf. 8.4 (Rev. CoP15). CITES Secretariat; Geneva.

Anon (2010). 'Compliance and enforcement'. CITES Resolution Conf. 11.3 (Rev. CoP15). CITES Secretariat: Geneva.

Wijnstekers, W. (2011). The Evolution of CITES. 9th Edition. International Council of Game and Wildlife Conservation: Hungary. 937 pp. Download.

2.2. International - CITES Requirements (Dietrich Jelden)

The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) was established to regulate trade in species that are threatened by international trade. All crocodilians are listed on the Appendices of CITES, on either Appendix I and/or Appendix II. Wijnstekers (2011; English, French) details the evolution of CITES since 1975 when it entered into force.

Transfer of crocodilian populations between the Appendices must be approved by the Conference of the Parties to CITES, and proposals must be submitted in accordance with Resolution Conf. 9.24 (CoP15) or Resolution Conf. 11.16 (Rev. CoP15)(ranching). Jelden et al. (2014) provide an overview of key events within CITES that have impacted on crocodilians.

Commercial international trade in Appendix-I listed crocodilians is prohibited, except through captive breeding from CITES-registered operations [Resolution Conf. 12.10 (Rev. CoP15)], and trade in Appendix-II species must demonstrate that trade is not detrimental to the survival of the species (ie non-detriment finding).

Resolution Conf. 11.12 (Rev. CoP15) outlines the marking system for crocodilian specimens in trade. In some countries, crocodile farms produce hybrids between two different species. The marking of specimens derived from hybrids is specifically addressed in Resolution Conf. 11.12 (Rev. CoP15). However, the general issue of hybridization and its legal implications are covered by Resolution Conf. 10.17 (Rev. CoP14).

The CITES Secretariat maintains a list of CITES-approved suppliers of tags for the identification of crocodilian skins, which are in compliance of

Resolution Conf. 11.12 (Rev. CoP15). The list is regularly updated and communicated by a Notification (currently Notification No. 2009/048) to the Parties of the Convention.

Control of trade in personal effects is covered by Resolution Conf. 13.7 (Rev. CoP14), which includes an exemption for four (4) crocodilian personal effects per person (Appendix-II species) from permitting requirements. However, some Parties may have stricter domestic measures than are required by CITES (Resolution Conf. 4.22 and Resolution Conf. 6.7), and not recognise this exemption of crocodilian personal effects.

Statistics on international trade in crocodilian products are compiled by the UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre (WCMC), which manages the searchable CITES Trade Database. Trends in crocodilian skin trade are regularly summarised (eg Caldwell 2010; Caldwell 2012).

 

References

Caldwell, J. (2010). World Trade in Crocodilian Skins, 2006-2008. UNEP-WCMC: Cambridge. Download.

Caldwell, J. (2012). World Trade in Crocodilian Skins, 2008-2010. UNEP-WCMC: Cambridge. Download.

Jelden, D. (2004). Crocodilians and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). Pp. 66-68 in Crocodiles. Proceedings of the 17th Working Meeting of the IUCN-SSC Crocodile Specialist Group. IUCN: Gland, Switzerland. Download.

Jelden, D., Jenkins, R.W.G. and Caldwell, J. (2014). Crocodilians and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) - Update February 2014. Crocodile Specialist Group: Darwin. Download.

Webb, G.J.W. (2004). Article IV of CITES and the concept of "non-detriment". Pp. 72-77 in Crocodiles. Proceedings of the 17th Working Meeting of the IUCN-SSC Crocodile Specialist Group. IUCN: Gland, Switzerland. Download.

Wijnstekers, W. (2011). The Evolution of CITES. 9th Edition. International Council of Game and Wildlife Conservation: Hungary. 937 pp. Download.

 

2.3. Regional Examples of Cross Border Approaches to Harmonizing Legislation and Management (Dietrich Jelden)

At various times the CSG has reviewed crocodilian management programs. On several occasions during such missions, the CSG concluded that cross boundary co-operation was urgently needed in order to effectively enhance conservation and management of shared trans-frontier crocodilian populations .

During a CSG mission to Indonesia, the need to develop a management program consistent with the successful harvesting regime in neighbouring Papua New Guinea, which operates in a practically identical environment with the same species and the same type of village level use, was a key recommendation. This recommendation focused in particular on the different legal size limits of large crocodiles in each country, which provided incentives for cross-border laundering of illegally taken wild skins (Messel et al. 1992).

 A similar key finding of a CSG review of Cambodia's management program (Jelden et al. 2005) focused on trans-boundary cooperation and, in particular, the largely unregulated trade in live animals to supply the farming industry in neighbouring countries such as Thailand and/or Vietnam. The review team concluded that a dialogue between neighbouring states, through a regional working group under an appropriate body (eg ASEAN wildlife trade initiative and/or Mekong River sub-regional CITES Working Group) should be established, to address regional issues and problems with C. siamensis. At the first regional species meeting held in Bangkok in 2011 (CSG 2011), participants agreed on several common activities to enhance cross-border co-operation, including review of existing legislation on penalties for illegal trade in wildlife (particularly C. siamensis) within all range states and determine the degree to which harmonization might be possible (Webb 2011).

In November 2007 the CSG held its first regional meeting for West Africa in the Republic of Niger. One of the major outcomes of this regional meeting was the proposal to develop a regional conservation and management strategy for crocodilians, which among others should consider issues such as the elaboration of a common crocodilian conservation policy, the harmonisation of national legislation for crocodilian conservation and management or the development of actions for further research on the three crocodilian species occurring in the region (Anon 2007a; Anon 2007b).

At its second regional meeting for West Africa held in March 2010 in Burkina Faso, the overarching objective of this meeting was to revisit the recommendations from the first regional meeting and establish a framework for a regional crocodilian conservation and management strategy (Jelden et al. 2010).

The key elements for a regional strategy that were finally agreed upon in Burkina Faso can be summarised as follows:

Policy and Legislation. Agreement was reached that new, crocodile-specific legal texts and actions were needed to ensure legal and sustainable management of crocodile populations across the region. Furthermore, harmonization between national, regional and international policies that applied to crocodile conservation and management was considered to be of major significance.

Science and Education. Despite the fact that some research is already being carried out in a few countries in the region (eg Benin, Gabon, The Gambia), it was noted that similar activities should be initiated in other countries across the region in order to improve knowledge on all three crocodile species and to facilitate better decision-making for their management and conservation.

Sustainable Use and Management. Given the current national and international (eg CITES Appendix I) protection of crocodiles in the region all commerce is effectively illegal. Uses are varied and include traditional medicine, bush meat, trophy hunting, skin trade and ecotourism. Most of these commercial activities require clarification as well as a review of respective legislation.

The consolidated strategy document was circulated in July 2010 by the Ministry of Environment of Burkina Faso to appropriate governmental decision-makers in the region for national review and appropriate implementation, taking into consideration both the specific conservation and management needs of each country.

Finally, during the 15th Conference of the Parties of CITES held in early 2010 in Qatar, the lack of regional co-operation became apparent with regard to a proposed downlisting of C. moreletii. If adopted in its submitted version, the proposal would have affected a shared C. moreletii population across all three range countries (ie Belize, Guatemala, Mexico). However, Mexico's original proposal to downlist all populations across the species' range was not supported by Guatemala, due to a lack of in-depth coordination and consultation at all levels. Following bilateral consultations at the CoP15 an amendment was made to the original proposal such that the C. moreletii population of Guatemala was withdrawn, leaving only the transfer of the populations of Mexico and Belize to CITES Appendix II. This amended proposal was finally approved by consensus.

There are definitely more examples from other crocodilian range which document the need for enhanced international co-operation and coordination where populations of crocodilian species are shared across national borders. Where such transnational cooperation is improved, management and conservation of affected crocodilian populations can benefit significantly. Furthermore, lessons learned indicate that it is clearly advisable to undertake reviews before national crocodilian management programs are developed and implemented, to determine any positive and negative implications of such programs on other populations beyond the jurisdiction of the respective country. Such reviews could provide an avenue for further insights into potential unfavourable or even detrimental implications arising from an uncoordinated approach. Finally, if conservation action is viewed from an international context, obstacles and problems associated with new management programs would not have to be identified separately by each country and, in addition, solutions to any such shortfalls could be more easily solved through co-ordinated trans-national dialogue.

References

Anon (2007a). Proceedings of 1st Workshop of the West African Countries on Crocodilian Farming and Conservation. Crocodile Specialist Group: Darwin. Download.

Anon (2007b). Summary of Conclusions reached at the 1st Regional Meeting of the IUCN-SSC Crocodile Specialist Group for West Africa on Conservation and Captive Management of Crocodiles, Tapoa, Niger, 13-15 November 2007. Download.

CSG (2011). Crocodiles. Proceedings of the 1st Regional Species Meeting. Crocodile Specialist Group; Darwin. Download in 8 parts at www.iucncsg.org/pages/publications.html.

Jelden, D., Lippai, C. and Martin, S. (2010). Promoting the development of regional crocodilian strategies - a recent case of good practice from West Africa. Pp. 89-109 in Crocodiles. Proceedings of the 20th Working Meeting of the Crocodile Specialist Group. IUCN: Gland, Switzerland. Download.

Jelden, D., Manolis, C., Giam, C.H., Thomson, J. and Lopez, A. (2005). Crocodile Conservation and Management in Cambodia - A Review with Recommendations. CSG: Darwin. Download.

Messel, H., Jelden, D. and Hemley, G. (1992). Summary Report of the Crocodile Specialist Group Review Committee on Crocodile Management in Indonesia, 5-12 November 1992. Pp. 55-70 in Crocodile Conservation Action. Special Publication of the IUCN/SSC Crocodile Specialist Group: Gland, Switzerland.

Webb, G. (2011). Working Group Results. Pp. 9-20 in Crocodiles. Proceedings of the 1st Regional Species Meeting. Crocodile Specialist Group; Darwin. Download.

Home                                                                         Next Section