Back to Home Page Bird Clubs Of New Jersey
Several Draft Resolutions to be submitted by the United States at the Tenth Meeting of the Conference of the Parties to CITES at Harare, Zimbabwe June 9 through June 20 of this year have alarmed American aviculturists, who fear a proposed definition of CITES Bred in Captivity will prove an impossible paperwork exercise. The U.S. has submitted a proposal to define the term "bred in captivity," to apply whether the specimens are of a species included in Appendix I,II, or III of CITES, and would apply regardless of whether or not the specimens were bred for commercial purposes. Determinations of captive bred status would be made exclusively by countries of export.
Wild caught specimens of CITES I birds or other species cannot be traded commercially; captive bred specimens can, traded as if they are CITES II. In an attempt to provide for a standard under which captive bred specimens are defined, the U.S Fish and Wildlife Service has submitted a resolution to the COP entitled "Specimens of Animal Species in Appendix I,II or III Bred in Captivity." The proposal would define this first generation offspring (FI) as specimens bred in captivity from parents "of which at least one was conceived in or taken from the wild." To achieve second or subsequent generation status (F2,F3,etc.) bred in captivity, both parents must meet the definition of bred in captivity. Propagation must take place in a controlled environment, set up expressly for the reproduction of the species in question. Actual mating or transfer of gametes must take place in the controlled environment.
"Bred in Captivity" as defined above would refer to Appendix I, II or III specimens, whether or not bred for commercial purposes, and would be so considered only upon satisfaction of COMPETENT government authorities of the relevant country' (emphasis added). In addition, it must be determined that the breeding program is 'established in a manner not detrimental to the species in the wild,' is sustainable, and that any augmentation from the wild would sustain such a non-detriment finding. For Appendix I species, the proposal requires that projects demonstrate the ability to reliably produce second generation offspring. For Appendix II and Appendix III species, facilities must demonstrate only their capability of producing such second generation offspring.
The United States has also submitted a proposal entitled, "Procedures for Registering and Monitoring Operations Breeding Appendix I Animal Species for Commercial Purposes," in an attempt to institute standardized procedures for registering and monitoring Appendix I captive breeding operations. Currently there are approximately sixty CITES registered operations, breeding fourteen different species in captivity for commercial purposes.
The Management Authority of each country, in consultation with its Scientific Authority, is responsible for initial approval of proposed captive breeding facilities, after which the CITES Secretariat would be consulted. After consultation with the Parties, and if no range state or other Party objects, an operations is registered with CITES I specimens known to be bred in captivity could be traded as CITES II specimens.
Though the Service acknowledges in its proposal that " commercial opportunity with Appendix I species may provide an incentive for developing better techniques for husbandry and captive breeding and for creating a source of specimens to relieve pressure on wild populations;" and recognizes "that the success of commercial captive breeding and an activity beneficial or at least neutral to conservation interests largely depends on the skill, concern and integrity of the operator;" their proposals seem to belie their alleged intent of facilitating distribution of CITES I specimens. The scope and volume of information proposed to be required to be provided to the Management Authority is massive, and appears to contain provisions so complicated as to be extremely difficult if not impossible to meet.
Establishment of origin of parental breeding stock alone poses a great paperwork hurdle for aviculturist, especially in the light of the non-detriment finding which must be made. Other reporting, documenting, marking and other requirements likely would impose excessive paperwork requirements on aviculturists and already overburdened USFWAS. Many aviculturist would likely agree that the USFWS proposals would constitute yet another disincentive to trade in endangered species.
The United States Fish and Wildlife Service's anti trade stance has a long history at CITES, under CITES specialist Susan Lieberman. Again this year, the United States will raise the issue of transport mortality, a subject that has roused some controversy in the past, when unsubstantiated reports of tremendously high mortality rates, particularly among birds, were reported by various anti-trade groups.
In 1992, at the Kyoto CITES meeting, the United States attempted to halt or substantially limit the import of certain species of birds that deemed to have 'unacceptably high records of mortality in shipping or quarantine." That percentage, unofficially agreed upon at ten percent, became two to five percent by the time the proposal was put before the delegation.
This new proposal would require annual reporting of mortality figures and information by the Parties. Figures of 70 to 80 per cent are commonly bandied about in the United States, particularly by animal rights groups, though supporting figures are predictably absent.
In the past, aviculturists have been the target of many unfounded allegations, whether from the animal rights groups, or from the Service itself. In this resolution, the Service incorporates a request for information from non governmental organizations, to include: "veterinary, scientific, conservation, welfare, and trade organizations with expertise in the shipment, preparation for shipment, transport, care, or husbandry of live animals, to provide the necessary financial, technical, and other assistance to those parties in need of and requesting such assistance...."
Aviculturists have seen the increasing incidence of 'junk science,' and now 'junk conservation,' and have expressed their concerns with this latest concession to those whose goal appears to be to end the keeping of and trade in birds. They will likely monitor this subject closely in this and upcoming CITES meetings.
Back to Home Page Bird Clubs Of New Jersey