CMS COP 2 Tuesday

Stand by for many interesting statistics and a territorial dispute.

‘Good morning’ says the CMS Executive Secretary brightly.

It is still dark outside and many regions have already been coordinating in corners scattered around the hotel complex. Indeed by opening the wrong door at the wrong time an unsuspecting NGO delegate could find him or herself stumbling into the middle of the politics of Africa, or Latin America or even the EU.

Barry Baker the distinguished Scientific Councillor for Bycatch, resplendent in a bright yellow shirt, enters and delegates rush to both congratulate and commiserate with him over his appointment last night to the role of chair of the lively Marine Working Group. This group started its work last night and after appointing its chairman, focused on the draft Marine Debris Resolution. This is widely advertised as the least contentious of the marine resolutions. The group did not finish its work and marine debris will sweep back in again later. Elsewhere the Future Shape working group is already ongoing.

Tuesday starts in the big hall in plenary with the “Meeting of the Whole”. All daylight is again excluded by the black-out blinds. This is going to be a day of many reports. UNEP gives one and then Germany reports on some aspects of progress with the convention, noting, amongst other things, that Russia is being encouraged to join the convention.

With the exception of Elizabeth, most secretariat staff appear to be in hiding this morning. They are probably down in Mission Control in the basement. Young Norwegian helpers clad in distinctive red and white T-shirts and grey shorts for girls and jeans for boys are helping make sure delegates are at ease; can find their seats; close the doors quietly and don’t trip over the many cables now snaking around the room.

UNEP CMC now reports on their analysis of the reports by Parties on their implementation of the Convention. Most Parties have made most CMS Appendix I species highly protected in their countries. Bycatch is the main threat to marine species; habitat destruction, fragmentation and modification are the main threats to terrestrial species; poaching and illegal trade affect many birds, terrestrial mammals and turtles; and man-made ‘obstacles’ including marine turbine developments, noise and pollution are also important threats.

Here come those statistics:

14 Parties reported hosting threatened migratory species not currently listed on Appendix I of CMS. Of these 20 species, most are birds and only two species (two falcons) have been proposed for listing here at COP 10.

11 Parties report that they have threatened species within their borders that are not currently listed on CMS Appendix II. One of these, the Argali sheep, will be considered at this meeting.

40 Parties reported that they were involved in the development of new Agreements; most of these are for birds. Some parties asked for assistance in both the processes of listing new species on the Appendices of CMS and also participation in new Agreement processes. A number of Parties have made voluntary contributions to CMS work including via its Trust Fund. IGOs and NGOs have also made contributions.

91% of parties have protected areas that extend to migratory species.

Satellite telemetry is increasingly being used by many Parties to monitor migratory species.

Parties reported on the implementation of 30 CMS Resolutions and 13 Recommendations. However the responses differed in detail from – ‘yes we have implemented’ to more detailed reports, making analyses difficult.

Argentina offers some comments to this assessment (detailed in Document 10.11). Under the heading fostering cooperation with other agreements she feels that the RFMOs lack the ability to implement measures and it is the Parties that should be doing this.

Argentina will also be submitting a number of notes to the Secretariat concerning South Georgia, the South Sandwich Islands and the Malvinas, which she says are part of Argentina and occupied illegally by the United Kingdom. Argentina requires that double nomenclature is required for these Islands and calls on the Secretariat to circulate these notes to the meeting and annex them to the report of the meeting.

The UK is waving its name plate.

India, however, takes the floor and notes various initiatives in his country. Measures include giving the highest degree of legal protection to many species and the need to address deaths resulting from electrocution.

The UK deeply regrets the need to make an intervention following that from the distinguished delegate from Argentina. They do not believe that this is the correct forum to make such statements. The UK does not have any doubt over its sovereignty over the Falkland, Sandwich and South Georgia islands and refers to the UN Charter and other international law which underline these rights. She adds that there can be no negotiation until the Falkland Islanders so wish, and they are regularly consulted on this matter. The use of any dual nomenclature is not supported by the UN and the UK rejects dual nomenclature. We frequently repeat our position at international meetings on this matter. Please include this statement as an annex she concludes.

One of the Secretariat’s Lauras has now been released from the basement and addresses the Meeting of the Whole on the issue of ‘Partnerships’. There are MoUs with the Bern Convention and many others and of course relationships within the CMS family.

Laura noted that WDCS is a ‘long standing and supportive partner’ which has helped in many ways, including with the Pacific MOU for cetaceans. WWF Russia has helped with the bukara deer. The Natural History Museum of Bonn is also mentioned.

NBSAPs: are the national implementation plans for biodiversity and their importance is described and then we move on to liaison with CBD and polar bears suddenly appear on the screens at the front of the room. A little later some windmills by a road appear. These are milestones on the long path ahead of us.

Following this latest presentation from the Secretariat (Francisco) a large number of flags are raised. It is a long way from the front of the room where the Chair of the Whole is sitting to the NGO benches and he squints as he tries to recognise who is asking for the floor.

The EU supports the resolution on cooperation and encourages more work with CBD.

Egypt found the presentations a little confusing. A lot of progress but little achieved, he says sadly.

Guinea asks Laura about the map she showed which shows fires in southern and western Africa. What were those fires about?

Chile thanks Franciso for his inspiring presentation.

Another delegate says OK we should harmonise with CBD but also with AWEA. How can we set about finding funding to revise our NBSAPs.

India speaks to his protected areas and ongoing work with IUCN. They have also organised a meeting of 8 elephant range states and from this came a declaration. They plan in 2013 to have a meeting of many more range states and hope they will be assisted in this. They look forward to a new Asian agreement for elephants.

Morocco speaks about synergies between secretariats and he believes that cooperation cannot be efficient unless the focal points are working together.

The Seychelles thanks the hosts and commends the CMS Secretariat for efforts to streamline its work.

IUCN refers to the 4th meeting of the chairs of the scientific bodies of the biodiversity-related conventions. IUCN produced a document coming from this and they now await comments from the conventions on this. It shows that CBS {Editor: should that be CMS?} can contribute to a number of the key targets.

Bird Life would like to see the development of effective framework for implementation at national level. She offers some words to amend the relevant resolution and this would read something like this: ‘Urges parties to develop national biodiversity working groups’ including various representatives (including NGOs) to ensure national implementation of the MEAs. There is a grumble of agreement from the NGO benches.

The CITES Secretariat notes that the secretariats agreed a joint work plan at the Standing Committee on Saturday. We are ‘walking the walk’ he says. There will a side event tomorrow lunchtime he advertises.

RAMSAR suggest some text to be added to resolution 10.21. He says this will address the lack of species-focused effort at CBD. The test would note CMS as the lead for migratory species and the need to more coherently address conservation at the species level.

The Secretariat answers on the earlier map query – we are trying to show fragmentation and problems, we were not trying to show fire as a specific issue for Africa.

Melanie Virtue of the Secretariat has now been released from the basement and reports on scientific liaison. This has a great acronym IPBES – The Intergovernmental Science-Policy platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services.

The EU sees value in the IPBES but has some changes to the resolution that it would like to make.

After coffee there is seemingly some disagreement between the Chairman of the Whole and the EU as to whether the changes to the resolution proposed (which sound like they may be substantive) should be read-out. In the end they are not.

Elizabeth now speaks about repealing of resolutions. She proposes bringing forward operative paragraphs from previous resolutions into new ones.

Argentina now calls again for the list of observers in writing. No such list has come to her yet.

Observers are now encouraged by the Chairman not to speak but rely on their written statements previously submitted and our opportunity to make a comment on our re-commitment to the work of CMS is denied.

We now hear about the overlap between the areas covered by the ASCOBANS and ACCOBAMS agreements. Under this item Egypt reports that is will accede to ACCOBAMS and extend the agreement’s area to the Red Sea. Exciting news!

And now the Netherlands is missing but needed to comment on the review of the ASCOBANS Secretariat. Forces are dispatched from Supreme Control in the basement to locate them. He is in the Future Shape meeting, so can we return to this say the EU?

Elizabeth now tells us about the arrangement for the ASCOBANS secretariat which is co-hosted in Bonn by CMS. Meanwhile a Dutch delegate – looking somewhat harassed – now enters the room.

Martin of the Netherlands who chaired the working group on ASCOBANS arrangements can now make his report. Amongst other things he notes that the Baltic countries wish to maintain their own working group. He expects the current arrangements to be supported, although he cannot predict the future.

Without further comment from the Parties, or anyone else (not that anyone else would be encouraged to say anything), the current arrangements stand.

We move to agenda 10.21 concerning the strategic plan. The EU thinks some essential information is missing which would allow them to evaluate if targets have been achieved.

This discussion is perhaps slightly odd as whilst we consider the strategic plan here in the Whole; somewhere not so far away, the Future of the Convention is being considered.

Outside in the coffee area two candles burn in the window and a large pile of books about Poland are stacked. Neither seems entirely relevant to the meeting but perhaps the candles are to draw the delegates into the light and act as a prayer for the migratory species here being debated.

The Migratory Wildlife Network bravely asks for amendments to be circulated so NGOs can see them too.

Laura of the secretariat now ‘wears a different hat’ (actually she does not seem to he wearing a hat – not even a yellow rain-hat – at all) and talks about financial matters. Approximately €1 million have been given to CMS as voluntary contributions. The main donors are countries but some money has also come from UNEP and elsewhere.

We then turn to GEF (the Global Environment Fund). Should we be seeking help from them? Again there is a draft resolution on this matter.

Argentina notes that the CMS convention deals with migratory species and GEF deals with different things.

Finally, some animals trot back in again and we move away from organisational, administrative and financial matters for a while. The Scientific Councillor for Terrestrial Mammals tells us about the antelopes. Sadly some are now critically endangered. An image of a dead antelope partially buried in the sand fills the big screens.

The oryx and addax are enjoying semi-captive management in Morocco where habitat restoration is also in progress. In Southeast Niger the Termit Tin Touma area hosts the last wild addax and many other important and attractive species. A reserve is being developed there.

Over lunch, the Marine Working Group met again. It left the marine debris resolution floating (spinning around in a gyre) and moved instead to look at the cetaceans work plan enshrined in another resolution. There is much grumbling from various delegates and many words are tweaked but the group’s chair Barry Baker still manages to make progress.

We move on in the big hall to species that are being considered for ‘concerted action’ introduced by Ms Cool of the Secretariat (spellings will be checked later). Here the CITES secretariat (as they did in the Scientific Committee) notes that they believe that there is only one species of elephant in Africa. Two are mentioned in the official list in front of the Parties. The Migratory Wildlife Network asks for clarification from the Scientific Council about how many species are recognised and the Secretariat responds that in the reference book they are using there are two.

Bird Life mentions some other species that should be brought forward for action. The red knot and the bristle-thighed curlew are added after a small discussion. No hang on… they are not…

The UK (for the EU) says we need to consider this within our region before we can agree.

Melanie Virtue now moves us on to new and future agreements. The implicit assumption that the CMS secretariat will just go on servicing MOUs and Agreements cannot stand says Melanie. She repeats how important the role of partners are in supporting many of these agreements. She also asks if new Agreements or MOUs are the only way forward; can we extend existing agreements or even look for other (non-CMS) bodies to act? Some ‘gap-analysis’ for elephants has been conducted by the Migratory Wildlife Network on this theme.

She moves on to talk about a possible instrument for cetaceans in the SE Asian region. No lead country has emerged to lead this work. It is very difficult without a lead nation she says.

India notes again the agreements his country is supporting.

The EU and its member states broadly support this draft resolution and suggests some minor amendments. One of these is that all species should be treated equally.

Nicola Hodgins of WDCS now intervenes (and is delighted that she didn’t appear on the big screens at the front of the hall):

‘Thank you Chairman, WDCS would like to re-affirm its commitment to supporting CMS and its daughter agreements, and urges range state parties of SE Asia and the Indian Ocean to demonstrate their commitment to cetacean conservation by commencing the necessary negotiations for what may need to be two separate cetacean-related agreements. In particular we hope that a lead party will step forward for each agreement and a timetable for action will be developed’.

The Redoubtable Rebecca Regenery of Humane Society International now takes to the floor and says firmly and clearly:

‘HSI has played an active role in the development of agreements under CMS, including ACAP and the Gorillas, Migratory Sharks, Marine Turtle, and Pacific Cetacean MoUs. HSI and other NGOs provide expertise and resources to these and future agreements’.

She welcomes the new signatories to the CMS Migratory Sharks MoU and note that this is the only international agreement that focuses on conservation of migratory sharks.

HSI commits to continuing to assist and support progress for the Migratory Shark MoU and will continue to assist with development and implementation of the Conservation Plan.

And finally, HSI Australia is pleased to have recently signed a partnership agreement with CMS and we look forward to continuing to work with CMS family.


Now we are back to the sly ways of birds and resolution 10.10. Just how sly are those birds?

{Editor: fly-ways not sly-ways. Please pay attention.}

Meanwhile the Migratory Species Network has decided that their desk and papers need a good wash and anointed them with a large glass of water. Helpful young ladies from the Secretariat appear with serviettes and help to polish away the dampness.

Meanwhile in the background to this spectacle there is some discussion about a mass migration of large numbers of migratory avian specialists. The avian experts have been migrating between a number of important meetings. The main flock consists of a Flyways Working Group and they have been oscillating between many relevant conventions (and probably their feeding and breeding grounds). One is singled out for special comment; The Professor Galbraith is a striking long-legged variety with deceptively dull plumage (probably good camouflage) but, as a long-standing CMS Scientific Councillor, he often forms the focus of the flock.

A gap analysis of bird coverage around the world shows that some birds lack coverage – this includes many seabirds. 30% of seabirds are considered threatened around the world.

A straggle of harassed NGO delegates now appear in the main hall; they have been driven out of the Future discussion because that meeting is now going into budgetary matters and no one but Parties is allowed to attend. They have now migrated back into the hall and the on-going record-breaking presentation on birds. This concludes with a call to strengthen cooperation with the Arctic Council and strengthen mechanisms.

{Please forgive the patchy coverage here; we were distracted by a number of non-avian matters, including tea and cakes. The Norwegians keep feeding us: Piles of fresh fruit nestle against stacks of profiteroles and a variety of gateauxs. It is a cornucopia of calories. Soon we will be too fat to get into the cabins of our aircraft and we will have to overwinter in Norway, where everyone else is lean and fit and they will punish us by making us wear lycra and forcing us into a programme of winter sports}.

Finally the birds flock off and we have a little ceremony for an award. This is the Lufthansa prize for the best student thesis. Over sixty students entered the competition. The winning thesis looked at the relationship between the honeybee and the elephant. The runners-up conducted research on the bobcats, herbivores in the Serengeti and migratory raptors.

Lucy King, the winner now takes to the stage and reports on her work. She shows that bees can be used as an elephant deterrent and that elephants produce a specific deep belly rumble that is associated with bees… and just as it is getting interesting we have to leave for a meeting of the Marine Working Group.

Marine debris now resurfaces and the cetacean resolution has been taken away for high-level political consideration.

Meanwhile, a little later somewhere else in the hotel another reception breaks out.

This is sponsored by Germany and we enter the room to find CMS Ambassador Stanley Johnson on stage encouraging people to donate to the convention. Along the way he notes the problems experienced by many migratory birds and in his characteristic good natured and avuncular manner stutters over the name of one and ends up entreating the congregation to

‘Save the Cornflake’.

The mispronounced bird would, in fact, be a corncrake.

Stanley went on to demonstrate his considerable fundraising skills by making a sincere plea for people, organisations, nations, to pledge money to CMS to enable it to continue its work to protect migratory animals.