Identifier
Created
Classification
Origin
10BRUSSELS159
2010-02-09 18:14:00
UNCLASSIFIED
Embassy Brussels
Cable title:  

BELGIUM: RESPONSE TO CITES COP-15 OUTREACH ON U.S. SPECIES

Tags:  SENV KSCA CITES AORC UNEP BE 
pdf how-to read a cable
VZCZCXYZ0010
RR RUEHWEB

DE RUEHBS #0159/01 0401814
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
R 091814Z FEB 10
FM AMEMBASSY BRUSSELS
TO SECSTATE WASHDC 9998
UNCLAS BRUSSELS 000159 

SIPDIS

STATE FOR OES/ENRC L.GAMBLE

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: SENV KSCA CITES AORC UNEP BE
SUBJECT: BELGIUM: RESPONSE TO CITES COP-15 OUTREACH ON U.S. SPECIES
PROPOSALS

REF: STATE 6668

SUMMARY
-------

UNCLAS BRUSSELS 000159

SIPDIS

STATE FOR OES/ENRC L.GAMBLE

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: SENV KSCA CITES AORC UNEP BE
SUBJECT: BELGIUM: RESPONSE TO CITES COP-15 OUTREACH ON U.S. SPECIES
PROPOSALS

REF: STATE 6668

SUMMARY
--------------


1. Economic officers delivered reftel points on February 5 to
Georges Evrard, Amelie Knapp and Miet van Looy, Belgium's Animal
Welfare and CITES Team at the Belgian Federal Public Service
Department of Health, Food Chain Safety and Environment. Evrard
will lead the Belgian delegation of experts to the Doha meetings,
although the Belgian ambassador in Qatar will be the official head
of delegation. Contact information for Evrard and the rest of the
Belgian delegation members is in paragraph 7. Belgium has yet to
arrive at a final position on the U.S. submissions, and of course
will need to harmonize its position within the European Union (EU),
which will be meeting on February 16 to prepare positions for the
Doha meetings. The officials said the hammerhead sharks proposal
was particularly strong and well argued, that the coral proposal was
also proactive in confronting criticism coming into the conference,
and that increased regulation on the snake trade was a good idea.
They said the oceanic whitetip shark and bobcat proposals raised
some questions due to underdeveloped look-alike standards, and they
were curious what was behind the U.S. proposal to de-list the
Bobcat. On polar bears, they had been studying the proposal
carefully, were still undecided, but believed more data would be
necessary before moving the species up to Appendix I; they were
unsure about the link between the decline in numbers and trade,
which CITES addresses. They thought the snake proposal was
worthwhile. End summary.

--------------
Sharks
--------------


2. The team noted that the proposal for the four hammerhead shark
species was very well written and strong. They were supportive of
the proposal to move the hammerhead shark species to Appendix II and
said that the EU is generally favorable to shark proposals.
However, they were less sure about the oceanic whitetip proposal,
which they said would be strengthened by a more in-depth look-alike
comparison that goes beyond fin color to differentiate between other
shark species. They mentioned the Food and Agriculture Organization

(FAO) had an issue with look-alikes.

--------------
Coral
--------------


3. The Belgians said that since the EU is doing a joint proposal on
corals, they were favorable to the proposal. They also mentioned
that the proposal was good at confronting earlier criticisms and
wondered if the U.S. had done outreach in order to identify and
respond to these criticisms in preparation for CoP-15.

--------------
Polar Bear
--------------


4. They said moving the polar bear from Appendix II to Appendix I is
something undecided on an EU level, and that they themselves were
still undecided on a Belgian position. The team cited climate
change as the main problem facing polar bears, saying more
information was needed to see if trade has a large impact on the
species with respect to climate. Also, they underlined that the
species is very widespread and that there is good management of the
species, such as the MoU between Canada and Greenland. They said
they would listen closely to the positions of range states on this
issue.

--------------
Bobcat
--------------


5. The team said that they did not fully understand the USG's motion
to delete the bobcat species from CITES Appendix II in the first
place, and asked whether more clarification could be provided as to
why this proposal was being made, and what the benefit of it would
be (i.e., reduction of administration burden). They wondered
whether states or industry lobbies could be pushing it, for example.
They said the issue was sensitive because they need to ensure that
it would not impact European populations of the lynx genus, such as
the Iberian lynx, which is very threatened. They also stated that
the ID guides for the bobcat, while good, were still of limited
value because they do not take into account such things as varying
colors within species and don't appear to consider other species
outside the lynx genus. They also thought that the guide lacked
instruction needed to identify the lynxes without more concrete
identifiers like the head and tail.

--------------
Snake

--------------


6. Belgium is supportive of the snake workshop; the experts said it
was not controversial, and support was more likely because funding
would be provided by the U.S

Delegation information
--------------


7. Dr Georges Evrard, head of delegation, general advisor to DG
Animals, Plants and Food Service Bien-etre Animal and CITES,
Georges.Evrard@health.fgov.be, tel.(32) 2 524 74 00.

Amelie Knapp, scientific advisor, Service Bien-etre Animal and
CITES, Amelie.knapp@health.fgov.be, tel (32) 2 524 74 25.; she is
responsible for all the listing proposals including Bobcat, Corals,
Sharks and also on snake trade.

Ms. Miet Van Looy, Miet.VanLooy@health.fgov.be
Frans Arijs, Frans.Arijs@health.fgov.be
(to be confirmed) Dr Philippe Jouk (Antwerp Zoo),
philippe.jouk@zooantwerpen.be
GUTMAN