First global agreement for the conservation of migratory ... · Aquatic Warbler Bukhara Deer Dugong...
Transcript of First global agreement for the conservation of migratory ... · Aquatic Warbler Bukhara Deer Dugong...
CMS Sharks MOU
First global agreement for the
conservation of migratory sharks
What is CMS?
UN Convention on the Conservation of
Migratory Species of Wild Animals
A Framework for countries for:
The conservation of migratory species throughout their
entire range
CMS – a global Convention
CMS Parties in the LAC region
• Antigua & Barbuda
• Argentina
• Bolivia
• Chile
• Costa Rica
• Cuba
• Ecuador
• Honduras
• Panama
• Paraguay
• Peru
• Uruguay
In process of joining:
Brazil & Colombia
• Antigua & Barbuda
• Argentina
• Bolivia
• Chile
• Costa Rica
• Cuba
• Ecuador
• Honduras
• Panama
• Paraguay
• Peru
• Uruguay
In process of joining:
Brazil & Colombia
CMS presence world wide
CMS Secretariat:
Bonn, Germany
CMS Secretariat:
Bonn, Germany
Abu Dhabi, UAE:• Raptors MOU
• Dugong MOU
Abu Dhabi, UAE:• Raptors MOU
• Dugong MOU
Apia, Samoa:• Pacific Islands
Cetaceans MOU
Apia, Samoa:• Pacific Islands
Cetaceans MOU
Bangkok, Thailand:• IOSEA Turtle MOU
Bangkok, Thailand:• IOSEA Turtle MOU
Hobart, Australia:• ACAP
Hobart, Australia:• ACAP
What is a migratory Species
under CMS?
“Significant proportion” of the population of a species
crosses national jurisdictional boundaries “cyclically and
predictably” or “periodically”
Migratory Species
Threats to Migratory Species
Habitat loss
• Degradation
• Fragmentation
Barriers to migration
• Dams
• Fences
• Transport infrastructure
• Energy infrastructure
Overexploitation
• Hunting & fishing
• Bycatch
Threatening processes
• Climate change
• Wildlife diseases
• Desertification
• Alien invasive species
• Pollution
• Underwater noise
Why do migratory Species
need special protection?
• One country alone cannot conserve a species crossing international borders
• Migratory species must be conserved throughout their entire range
�An international approach is needed
Which Species are protected?
Appendix I: Endangered Species
• In danger of extinction in all or most of their range
• Taking prohibited
(exceptions: e.g. science, breeding & traditional
subsistence usage)
Appendix II
• Unfavourable conservation status, or
• Would benefit significantly from an international
Agreement
Favourable Conservation
Status
“favourable conservation status" if:
o population dynamics data indicate that migratory sharks are sustainable on a long term basis as a viable component of their ecosystems
o the distributional range and habitats of migratory sharks are not currently being reduced, nor are they likely to be reduced in the future to levels that affect the viability of their populations in the long term
o the abundance and structure of populations of migratory sharks remains at levels adequate to maintain ecosystem integrity
Sharks Siberian Crane
Slender-billed Curlew
West African Aquatic
Mammals
Agreements and
MOUs
Wadden Sea Seals
ACAP EUROBATS ACCOBAMS
ASCOBANS Gorilla AEWA
Agreements – legally binding
Aquatic Warbler
Bukhara Deer Dugong Great Bustard
High Andean Flamingo
Marine Turtles Africa
IOSEA Mediterranean Monk Seal
Pacific Cetaceans
Raptors Ruddy Headed Goose
Saiga Antelope
West African Elephants
Grassland Birds of South America
Huemul
MOUs – legally non-binding
Sharks MOU
45 % of all migratory sharks assessed are
endangered (IUCN 2007)
General charachteristics of
the Sharks MOU
• Concluded in 2010
• 3 Annexes:
I: Species List
II: Regions
III: Conservation Plan
Main objective of the Sharks
MOU
Achieve and maintain a favourable conservation
status for migratory sharks
• based on the best available scientific information
• taking into account the socio-economic and other
values of these species for the people of the
Signatory States
Species in Appendix I CMS
• White Shark (C. carcharias)
• Basking Shark (C. maximus)
• Giant Manta Ray (M. birostris)
not covered by the MOU yet
CMS Appendix I: NO TAKING ALLOWED
Species covered by the MOU
• White Shark (C. carcharias)
• Basking Shark (C. maximus)
• Whale Shark (R. typus)
• Porbeagle (L. nasus)
• Spiny Dogfish (S. acanthias)
� northern hemnisphere
• Longfin Mako (I. paucus)
• Shortfin Mako (I. oxyrinchus)
Range of Species protected
under CMS
Basking shark White shark
Longfin mako
Porbeagle
Whale shark
Shortfin mako
Spiny dogfish maps: IUCN, The
Emirr/MapLab/Cypron
Giant manta ray
Conservation Plan
Five Objectives
A. Improving scientific knowledge
B. Applying Sustainable Fisheries
C. Protecting critical habitats, migratory
corridors and critical life stages of sharks
D. Increasing public awareness and participation
in conservation
E. Enhancing national, regional and
international cooperation
Conservation Plan
Objective A
Improving understanding of migratory shark
populations through research, monitoring and
information exchange
Conservation Plan
Objective B
Ensuring that directed and non-directed fisheries for sharks are
sustainable
• Fisheries-related research and data collection
• Ecologically sustainable management of shark populations, including
monitoring, control and surveillance
• Bycatch
• Policy, legislation and law enforcement
– Review of domestic Policy
– International Trade
– Finning
– Law Enforcement
– Economic incentives
Conservation Plan
Objective C
Ensuring to the extent practicable the
protection of critical habitats and migratory
corridors and critical life stages of sharks
– Conservation activities
– Legislation
– Economic Incentives
Conservation Plan
Objective D
Increasing public awareness of threats to
sharks and their habitats, and enhance public
participation in conservation activities
– Awareness Raising
– Stakeholder
Participation
Conservation Plan
Objective E
Enhancing national, regional and international
cooperation
– Cooperation among governments
– Cooperation with existing instruments and
organizations related to shark conservation
– Accession to international instruments relevant
for the conservation and management of sharks
General Principles
• Successful shark conservation and
management require the fullest possible
cooperation:
– Governments
– IGOs, including relevant MEAs (CITES, CBD,
UNCLOS)
– NGOs
– Fishing industry
– Local communities
General Principles
Sharks should be managed allowing for
sustainable harvest
– Signatories should apply
• Ecosystem approach
• Precautionary approach
– Establishment of
• bilateral
• sub-regional
• regional management plans
26 Signatories
South & Central
America and the
Caribbean
Chile,
Costa Rica
Africa
Congo (Rep.), Ghana, Guinea, Liberia,
Kenya, South Africa, Senegal, Togo
Asia
Philippines
Oceania
Australia,
Nauru,
Palau,
Tuvalu,
Vanuatu
Bodies of the MOU
Interim Secretariat
• Assists MOS and AC
Advisory Committee
• Provides scientific Advice
Meeting of the Signatories
• Decision making body Imp
lem
en
tati
on
MO
UCooperating
Partners:• non-Range States
• IGOs
• NGOs
• or other relevant
bodies and
entities
Meeting of the Signatories
(MOS)
• Decision making body
• Decisions should be taken by consensus
• Assessment of – Progress in
implementing the
MOU
– Amendments to the
MOU
• Frequency: 3 Years
Advisory Committee
Tasks of the Advisory Committee
• Provide expert advice and information
• Make recommendations on
• new initiatives
• the implementation of the MOU and the Conservation
Plan
• Analyze scientific assessments
• Review listing proposals and listing criteria
Advisory Committee
Membership
• Experts in migratory shark science and
management
• Members of the Advisory Committee serve in
their individual capacity
• Regional representation
Advisory Committee
Oceania (1)
• Lesley Giddings
Africa (2)
• Mika Samba Diop
• Boaz Kaunda-Arara
South & Central America
and the Caribbean (2)
• Jairo Sancho Rodríguez
• Enzo Acuña
Europe (2)
• James Ellis
• Mariano Vacchi
North America (1)
• John Carlson
Asia (2)
• To be identified
Secretariat
• Convention Secretariat in Bonn: Interim Secretariat
• Clearinghouse between – Signatories
– Advisory Committee
Secretariat
Tasks of the Interim Secretariat
• Organization of Meetings
• Facilitate and promote implementation of co-operative activities
• Consult and share information with:– IGOs, NGOs, FAO, relevant RFMOs, CITES, CBD, Regional Seas
Conventions, stakeholders of the fishing industry and local communities, and other relevant international organizations
• Outreach (Signatories, Cooperating Partners)
• Awareness raising
• Fundraising
Cooperating Partners
Humane Society International
– Australia
– USA
• IFAW
• Shark Advocates
International
• D.E.G.
• Project Aware
• Shark Trust
MOS 1
Bonn, Germany, Sept 2012
MOS 1
Bonn, Germany, Sept 2012
• 100 participants from 20
Signatories and 25 Range
States
• 20 Organizations
– IGOs (e.g. CITES, FAO, UNEP,
INTERPOL)
– NGOs (e.g. IFAW, PEW, HSI)
– Scientists (e.g. IUCN SSG, BfN)
MOS 1
Bonn, Germany, Sept 2012
Side event: Fin Identification
Becoming a Signatory to the
MOU
• Legally non-binding!
• Open for Signature by all Range States and REIOs
of the Shark Species listed in Annex I� Any State, that exercises jurisdiction over any part of the range of
migratory sharks, or
� A State, flag vessels of which are engaged outside its national
jurisdictional limits in taking, or which have the potential to take
migratory sharks
• Contacts for information: – [email protected]
Prospects of the MOU
• Increase number of Signatories and Cooperating partners
• Enhance cooperation with the Fisheries Sector, RFMOs, RSCs, and relevant MEAs
• Grow Awareness on Shark conservation and threats to sharks
• Improve knowledge about sharks
• Make use of sharks sustainable to maintain healthy ecosystems for future generations
"I am the sea. In my depths all treasures
dwell?"
Muhammad Hafiz Ibrahim
Thank you very much!