|
Sustainable
eNews |
November 2002 |
|
|
IWMC
World Conservation Trust |
|
What Price
Wildlife?
November 11, 2002
|
The decision by the Parties on Friday not to
transfer minke and Bryde’s whales to Appendix II is not without cost. The
case presented by Japan was as thorough and decisive as any Party could
realistically expect, while arguments put forward by opponents can more
truthfully be characterized as excuses. If COP12 worked on a jury system
rather than the votes of its members, Japan would have won the verdict and
their opponents would have been incarcerated for wasting the court’s
time.
Moreover, the Parties appeared strangely unmoved by Japan’s
willingness to make significant concessions, which some whaling nations
even viewed as being overly generous. So, it seems there is no middle
ground and no obvious area for compromise in the future.
The biggest losers on Friday are those species that may now
never make it to Appendix I or II, however deserving their cause. Parties
will note that scientific evidence is no longer a reliable arbiter in CITES
decision-making and will likely resist moves that could prove irreversible
in the future.
Listing on Appendices was never intended to be a permanent
act, but the rules have now been rewritten. CITES has scored a significant
own goal and enters half-time at COP 12 in deficit. It now needs to support
the plan agreed by southern African countries on the ivory trade and reject
future involvement in fisheries if it is to recover its purpose in
Santiago. „
|
Stumped Down Under
November 11, 2002
|
In contrast to its relentless national cricket team,
the Australian delegation to COP12 seems to battling its own internal
contradictions.
Australia does not participate in the long drawn out
"process" in the International Whaling Commission (IWC) to
produce a Revised Management Scheme (RMS) on the grounds that it will not
countenance whale harvesting under any agreed system. IWMC admires its
honesty.
Nevertheless, on Friday Australia declared that abundant
minke and Bryde’s whales should not be transferred to Appendix II because
the IWC had not yet authorized commercial whaling, something that cannot
happen until the RMS has been instituted. This argument might hold for
those countries participating in RMS deliberations, but those who decline
to do so look remarkably disingenuous when they do they same.
Next week the Australian delegation is persisting with its
doomed proposal to place the Patagonian Toothfish in Appendix II. With
strong resistance from the Commission for the Conservation of Antarctic
Marine Living Resources (CCAMLR), of which Australia is not only a member
but also the host nation, and few countries agreeing to support it, we
suggest that Australia withdraw this ill-conceived proposal as soon as
possible. 
|
