COPIED AND PASTED FROM HERPDIGEST.ORG COMMUNICATION



HERPDIGEST SPECIAL CITES ISSUE 7/18/09 – Herp Related Issues to Be Discussed at COP15 in Doha, Qatar, March 13-25, 2010.



CITES COP15: USF&WS ANNOUNCEMENT OF SPECIES PROPOSALS AND PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS, DECISIONS, AND AGENDA ITEMS BEING CONSIDERED BY THE UNITED STATES (This is excerpted from their full summary report, herp related Issues only, For full report, with other animals being proposed or considered, (Corals, plants, mammals, fish(a lot of sharks this time), and/or copy of Federal Register announcement email us at asalzberg@herpdigest.org



__________________________________

DATES: USF&WS will consider written information and comments you submit concerning potential species proposals, and proposed resolutions, decisions, and agenda items that the United States is considering submitting for consideration at CoP15, and other items relating to CoP15, if received them September 11, 2009. (See Below for contact information)



_________________________________________________

DOCUMENT US IS CONSIDERING SUBMITTING FOR DISCUSSION



Asian Snake Trade



The United States is considering submitting a discussion document on the conservation issues associated with and management of the snake trade in Asia. The international and domestic trade in snakes in Asia provides important economic benefits to the region and is an important source of medicinals, food, leather, and other products. The United States is a large importer of some snake products. However, relatively little attention has been paid to evaluating and understanding the conservation implications of this trade, which involves both wild-caught and farm-raised animals. Regular reports of confiscations of international snake shipments also indicate a pervasive illegal and undocumented trade to supply consumer demand. If the United States decides to submit a document, it will focus on opening a dialogue with other Parties, potentially by calling for a workshop to discuss these issues, a process similar to one recently used to examine the freshwater and terrestrial turtle!

trade.



_________________________________________________________________



THE UNITED STATES IS LIKELY TO DEVELOP AND SUBMIT PROPOSALS FOR THE FOLLOWING TAXA PENDING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND CONSULTATIONS.



In some cases, the US has completed consultations with relevant range countries. In other cases, they expect meetings to occur in the immediate future at which participants will generate important recommendations, trade analyses, or biological information on the taxon in question. See the discussions below for more details. They have delineated what additional information they are seeking or have sought to assist them in making their decisions.



1) Common snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina) – Inclusion in Appendix III



The IUCN/SSC Tortoise and Freshwater Turtle Specialist Group recommended that the United States propose inclusion of the common snapping turtle (Chelydra serpentina) in Appendix III of CITES. The Specialist Group stated that trade of mainly adult turtles coupled with a lack of consistency in U.S. State regulations is likely to cause localized population depletions, particularly at the periphery of the species’ range. The common snapping turtle is a wide-ranging species occurring in the United States, Canada, throughout Mexico, and as far south as Ecuador. In the United States, its conservation status is reported as “secure.” In Canada it is classified as a “Species of Special Concern.” The species is characterized by delayed female maturation, relatively low fecundity, low recruitment, and long generation times. Most U.S. States regulate the harvest of turtles for commercial and/or personal use. More than a million and a half live common snapping turtles, primarily for consu!

mption, were exported from the United States to Southeast Asia between 2005 and 2008. Approximately 52 percent of these specimens were reported as wild-harvested, and 48 percent were reported as captive-bred specimens (which may include wild-collected eggs and juvenile turtles).



Inclusion of a species in Appendix III is a unilateral decision and does not require a proposal to be brought forward to the CoP. According to CITES Resolution Conf. 9.25 (Rev. CoP14) (Inclusion of species in Appendix III), a Party should only include a native species in Appendix III if there are regulations in place to prevent or restrict exploitation and to control trade, and if the cooperation of other Parties is needed to control illegal trade. To determine if the common snapping turtle should be listed in Appendix III, we seek further information on its population status, threats to the species, and trade impacts, in particular information on illegal international commercial trade in the species. The United States remains undecided about including the species in Appendix III, pending the availability of additional information and consultation with the U.S. States and other range countries.



2) Spotted turtle (Clemmys guttata) – Inclusion in Appendix II



The Mid-Atlantic Turtle & Tortoise Society recommended that the United States propose the spotted turtle (Clemmys guttata) for inclusion in Appendix II, noting concern about the capture of wild individuals, especially adults, for the pet trade. The spotted turtle occurs in eastern North America, including 21 U.S. States and two Canadian provinces. The spotted turtle is relatively small, but long lived. The presumed primary threats to the spotted turtle are habitat fragmentation and alteration, grazing, draining and filling of wetlands, road mortality, collecting by hobbyists, artificial control of water levels, and water pollution. Canadian officials estimated a total population size of adult spotted turtles in that country of about 2000 individuals. The size of the U.S. population has not been estimated. The short-term population size trend is declining to stable. Turtle populations in areas with heavy development likely have suffered the greatest declines in numbers.



Approximately 600-700 live specimens are exported from the United States per year and are primarily reported as captive-bred specimens (which may include wild-collected eggs and juvenile turtles). The United States proposed to include the spotted turtle in Appendix II at CoP11 and the proposal failed to gain the necessary two-thirds majority for adoption at that meeting. It is unclear whether harvest of specimens of spotted turtles from the wild for international trade is reducing wild populations to levels at which survival might be threatened by continued harvesting. As a result, the United States remains undecided about proposing to include the species in Appendix II. We seek further information about its population status, threats to the species, and, in particular, the impact to the species from international trade, and will consult with the U.S. States and Canada.



3) Diamondback terrapin (Malaclemys terrapin) – Inclusion in Appendix II



The IUCN/SSC Tortoise and Freshwater Turtle Specialist Group recommended that the United States propose the diamondback terrapin (Malaclemys terrapin) for inclusion in Appendix II because the species is “documented to be vulnerable to over-exploitation” and has an “intrinsically slow capacity to recover.” The diamondback terrapin is native to the United States and is found along the Atlantic Coast of the eastern United States from Cape Cod, Massachusetts, to the Florida Keys and west along the Gulf Coast to Texas. The species is characterized by delayed female maturation, small clutch size, low recruitment and low neonate survivorship, high site fidelity and limited dispersal, and habitat specialization. The diamondback terrapin occupies a large coastal range, but the status of the species differs in various areas throughout its range.



All 16 range States in the United States regulate the harvest of diamondback terrapins; 9 States prohibit harvest from the wild and 7 allow it (of which 4 allow harvest from the wild for commercial purposes). The total population size and trend is unknown. The species appears to be threatened by loss of nesting habitat and incidental mortality in crab pots. Currently, live specimens of the species are traded internationally, most likely for consumption and the pet trade. More than 10,000 specimens were exported from the United States between 2005 and 2008. More than 45 percent of international trade in live diamondback terrapins is reportedly wild-sourced specimens, while the remaining specimens are reported to be from captive sources and ranching operations (which may include wild-collected eggs and juvenile turtles). Historically, overharvest was a major threat to the species, with many of the diamondback terrapin populations, especially those near coastal metropolitan are!

as, being nearly extirpated by the 1920s.



The diamondback terrapin may meet the criteria for listing in CITES Appendix II; however, further consultation with the U.S. States is required to better understand its population status and the circumstances surrounding wild-harvest and captive breeding of the species. As a result, the United States remains undecided about proposing this species for inclusion in Appendix II, pending consultation with the States and the availability of additional information.



4) Florida soft-shell turtle (Apalone ferox) – Inclusion in Appendix II



The IUCN/SSC Tortoise & Freshwater Turtle Specialist Group recommended that the United States propose the Florida soft-shell turtle (Apalone ferox) for inclusion in Appendix II based on concerns about overharvest due to the species’ “distinctive reproductive physiology and slow recovery potential.” This U.S.-endemic, freshwater turtle is characterized by delayed female maturation, a small clutch size (2-6 eggs per clutch), lengthy incubation period, and low neonate survivorship. The species occupies a small range (four U.S. States), is easily located by its distinctive burrowing, and shows little reaction to human disturbance when basking, all of which increase its susceptibility to trapping. It is protected in one State, and harvest is regulated in two States. Its status is reported as “secure” in two States, although population trends are unknown throughout its range.



The presumed primary threat to Florida soft-shell turtles is overharvest throughout its range. The species is internationally traded primarily as live specimens, as well as live and dead eggs, for the pet trade and consumption. More than one million specimens were exported from the United States between 2005 and 2008. More than nine percent of trade in live specimens is reportedly wild-sourced specimens and the other source reported is captive-bred (which may include wild-collected eggs and juvenile turtles). The Florida soft-shell turtle may meet the criteria for listing in CITES Appendix II; however, further consultation with the U.S. States is required to better understand its population status and the circumstances surrounding wild-harvest and captive breeding of this species. As a result, the United States remains undecided about proposing this species for inclusion in Appendix II, pending consultation with the States and the availability of additional information.



5) Smooth soft-shell turtle (Apalone mutica) – Inclusion in Appendix II



The IUCN/SSC Tortoise & Freshwater Turtle Specialist Group recommended that the United States propose the smooth soft-shell turtle (Apalone mutica) for inclusion in Appendix II based on concern for overharvest due to the species’ “distinctive reproductive physiology & slow recovery potential.” This U.S.-endemic, freshwater turtle is characterized by delayed female maturation, a small clutch size (but multiple clutches), high neonate parental involvement, and low neonate survivorship. Males bask in shallow water and nests are often in close proximity to each other, facilitating collection. Although the species is wide-ranging (22 U.S. States), its population status is largely unknown, and it is reportedly extirpated from Pennsylvania and possibly extirpated from West Virginia.



The presumed primary threats to smooth soft-shell turtles are overharvest and habitat loss or habitat degradation, some predation and bycatch, and periodic natural flooding. The species is internationally traded as live specimens, apparently for the pet trade and consumption. More than 12,000 specimens were exported from the United States between 2005 and 2008. Approximately one percent of these specimens are reported as wild-harvested, and the remainder as captive-bred or captive-held (which may include wild-collected eggs and juvenile turtles). The smooth soft-shell turtle may meet the criteria for listing in CITES Appendix II; however, further consultation with the U.S. States is required to better understand its population status and the circumstances surrounding wild-harvest and captive breeding of this species. As a result, the United States remains undecided about proposing this species for inclusion in Appendix II, pending consultation with the States and the availab!

ility of additional information.



6) Spiny soft-shell turtle (Apalone spinifera) – Inclusion in Appendix II



The IUCN/SSC Tortoise & Freshwater Turtle Specialist Group recommended that the United States propose the spiny soft-shell turtle (Apalone spinifera) for inclusion in Appendix II based on concern for overharvest due to the species’ “distinctive reproductive physiology and slow recovery potential.” This freshwater turtle is native to Canada, the United States, and Mexico, and is characterized by a much-delayed female maturation, small clutch size (laying eggs perhaps twice a year), and a lengthy incubation period. Where habitat is limited, nests may be clumped, facilitating collection. The species is wide-ranging (37 U.S. States, 2 Canadian Provinces, and 4 Mexican States), and its conservation status is reported as “secure” or “apparently secure” throughout much of its U.S. range.



The presumed primary threats to spiny soft-shell turtles are overharvest or illegal harvest and habitat loss or degradation, as well as some predation and fishing bycatch. The species is traded internationally as live specimens, apparently for the pet trade and consumption. More than 252,000 specimens were exported from the United States between 2005 and 2008. Approximately two percent of these specimens are reported as wild-harvested, and the remainder as captive-bred or captive-held (which may include wild-collected eggs and juvenile turtles). The spiny soft-shell turtle may meet the criteria for listing in CITES Appendix II; however, further consultation with range States is required to better understand its population status and the circumstances surrounding wild-harvest and captive breeding of this species. As a result, the United States remains undecided about proposing this species, pending consultation with Canada, Mexico, and the U.S. States, and the availability of!

additional information.



7). Giant leaf-tailed gecko (Uroplatus giganteus) – Transfer from Appendix II to Appendix I



The United States is considering a proposal that would transfer the giant leaf-tailed gecko (Uroplatus giganteus) from Appendix II to Appendix I, because of concerns that the discovery of the new species will encourage illegal harvest. The giant leaf-tailed gecko was discovered in 2004 and is native to Madagascar. It is found only in Montagne d’Ambre National Park. It is a rainforest species that is morphologically very similar to the more widespread common flat-tailed gecko (U. fimbriatus). However, it is genetically distinct and is the largest gecko in Madagascar. Little is known about the population size or trend and it may be relatively abundant in the national park. While it is protected in the park, there is concern that its large size will make it a target of the pet industry. According to the UNEP-WCMC CITES Trade Database, only two specimens were exported and imported between 1998 and 2008. The reported trade occurred in 2007, when two bodies were shipped from Madag!

ascar to Germany.



The primary threat to the giant leaf-tailed gecko is likely to be deforestation. It is unclear whether this species qualifies for Appendix I of CITES. Further consultation with Madagascar is required to better understand the impacts of international trade on the species. As a result, the United States remains undecided about proposing the giant leaf-tailed gecko for transfer from 20



Appendix II to Appendix I, pending consultation with Madagascar and the availability of additional information.



________________________________________________________________

.

WHAT SPECIES PROPOSALS IS THE UNITED STATES NOT LIKELY TO SUBMIT FOR CONSIDERATION AT COP15, UNLESS WE RECEIVE SIGNIFICANT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION?



The United States does not intend to submit proposals for the following taxa unless we receive significant additional information indicating that a proposal is warranted. Information currently available for each of the taxa listed below does not support a defensible listing proposal. For each taxon, we describe external factors that diminish the need for a U.S. listing proposal, as well as critical information gaps that prohibit us from developing a proposal. In addition to the taxa listed below, please note that the Animal Welfare Institute provided us with a tentative list of taxonomic groups of animal species for which it was recommending that the United States consider amendments to the Appendices. These groups of species included “native and non-native species including freshwater turtles, sharks, furbearers, fish, and ungulates.” We do not have the resources to evaluate such a broad request in the timeframes necessary for decision-making for CoP15. Therefore, the Unite!

d States does not intend to submit any proposals to the CoP as a result of this recommendation.





Amphibians



1) Blue-sided frog (Agalychnis annae) – Inclusion in Appendix II



Defenders of Wildlife and SSN recommended that the United States propose the blue-sided frog (Agalychnis annae) for inclusion in Appendix II. The species is found only in Costa Rica and has been extirpated from streams mostly near San Jose. However, it seems to tolerate disturbance in polluted streams and in coffee plantations. Threats include susceptibility to predation of larvae by introduced fish and chytridiomycosis. The species is listed as endangered by IUCN with a declining population trend. Trade data for the species is unavailable. Since the species’ range is limited to Costa Rica, we will consult with Costa Rica. But, the United States is unlikely to submit a proposal for inclusion of this species in Appendix II at CoP15 unless significant additional information is received about the species’ biological status and trade, or Costa Rica requests our assistance.



2) Morelet’s tree frog (Agalychnis moreletii) – Inclusion in Appendix II



Defenders of Wildlife and SSN recommended that the United States propose the Morelet’s tree frog (Agalychnis moreletii) for inclusion in Appendix II. This species is found in Belize, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, and Mexico. In Mexico, it has disappeared from former survey sites due to chytridiomycosis and is probably uncommon, except in breeding aggregations. Wild populations in Guatemala and Honduras appear to have declined due to habitat loss. The species is listed as critically endangered by IUCN with a declining population trend. While it was formerly common in the pet trade, recent trade data for 2005 to 2008 indicate that 188 specimens were imported into the United States: 173 of those specimens were wild-caught in Guatemala. Because the wild population is very small and fragmented and trade may exacerbate population decline caused by the chytrid fungus, we will consult with the range countries. However, the United States is unlikely to submit a proposal for inclu!

sion of this species in Appendix II at CoP15 unless significant additional information is received about the species’ biological status and trade, or a range country requests our assistance.



3) Rancho Grande harlequin frog (Atelopus cruciger) – Inclusion in Appendix II



Defenders of Wildlife and SSN recommended that the United States propose the Rancho Grande harlequin frog (Atelopus cruciger) for inclusion in Appendix II. This species is only found in the Northern and Southern versants of the Corillera de la Costa of Venezuela. No specimens have been seen since 1986, except in 2004, when a small population was discovered in a cloud forest. Potential threats are acid rain, drought, chytridiomycosis, and over-collecting. Recent trade data for 2005 to 2008 do not specifically indicate the importation of the species into the United States. It is listed as critically endangered by IUCN with a declining population trend. We will consult with Venezuela, but the United States is unlikely to submit a proposal for inclusion of this species in Appendix II at CoP15 unless significant additional information is received about the species’ biological status and trade, or Venezuela requests our assistance.



4) Helmeted water toad (Caudiverbera caudiverbera) – Inclusion in Appendix II



Defenders of Wildlife and SSN recommended that the United States propose the helmeted water toad (Caudiverbera caudiverbera) for inclusion in Appendix II. This species is found in Chile and possibly Argentina, in deep ponds and reservoirs. Threats include harvesting for local consumption, water pollution, and consumption by introduced trout, and pond drainage. Recent trade data for 2005 to 2008 do not specifically indicate the importation of the species into the United States. It is listed as vulnerable by IUCN with a declining population trend. There is no indication that trade is impacting the wild population. The United States is unlikely to submit a proposal for inclusion of this species in Appendix II at CoP15 unless significant additional information is received about the species’ biological status and trade, or a range country requests our assistance.



5) Santa Fe frog (Leptodactylus laticeps) – Inclusion in Appendix II



Defenders of Wildlife and SSN recommended that the United States propose the Santa Fe frog (Leptodactylus laticeps) for inclusion in Appendix II. This species is found in the Gran Chaco of Paraguay, Bolivia, and Argentina. It is common in parts of Paraguay and Bolivia. Recent trade data for 2005 to 2008 do not specifically indicate the importation of the species into the United States. However, IUCN identifies overharvesting in Paraguay and Argentina for the international pet trade as a cause for its decline. The species is listed as near threatened by IUCN with a declining population trend. The United States is unlikely to submit a proposal for inclusion of this species in Appendix II at CoP15 unless significant additional information about the species’ biological status and trade is received, or a range country requests our assistance.



6) Giant Asian river frog (Limnonectes blythii) – Inclusion in Appendix II



Defenders of Wildlife and SSN recommended that the United States propose the giant Asian river frog (Limnonectes blythii) for inclusion in Appendix II. This species is found in Southeast Asia, including Laos, Malaysia, Singapore, Thailand, and Viet Nam. It is considered very common to not common throughout its range. Local consumption and national and international trade threaten the species. Recent trade data for 2005 to 2008 indicate the importation of 107 specimens of the species into the United States. All were wild-caught. The species is listed as near threatened by IUCN with a declining population trend. The United States is unlikely to submit a proposal for inclusion of this species in Appendix II at CoP15 unless significant additional information is received about the species’ biological status and trade, or a range country requests our assistance.



7) Fanged river frog (Limnonectes macrodon) – Inclusion in Appendix II



Defenders of Wildlife and SSN recommended that the United States propose the fanged river frog (Limnonectes macrodon) for inclusion in Appendix II. This species is found in Indonesia on Java and Sumatra. It is threatened by agricultural runoff, fuel wood collection, pollution, and the international trade for its parts and products. Recent U.S. import data do not specifically show imports of L. macrodon, but do show imports of Limnonectes spp. Between 2005 and 2008, these U.S. records indicate that 64,240 kilograms of legs, 917 skins, and 75 other products of Limnonectes spp. were imported into the United States. All of the specimens, except for the “other products,” were reported from captive-bred or farmed origin. The species is listed as vulnerable by IUCN with a declining population trend. The United States is unlikely to submit a proposal for inclusion of this species in Appendix II at CoP15 unless significant additional information is received about the species’ biologi!

cal status and trade, or Indonesia requests our assistance.



8) Giant Philippine frog (Limnonectes magnus) – Inclusion in Appendix II



Defenders of Wildlife and SSN recommended that the United States propose the giant Philippine frog (Limnonectes magnus) for inclusion in Appendix II. This species is found in the Philippines and Indonesia. It is threatened by agriculture, logging, pollution, subsistence harvest, international export, and mine tailings. It is protected within protected areas in its range. Recent U.S. import data do not specifically show imports of L. magnus, but do show imports of Limnonectes spp. Between 2005 and 2008, these U.S. records indicate that 64,240 kilograms of legs, 917 skins, and 75 other products of Limnonectes spp. were imported into the United States.

All of the specimens, except for the “other products,” were reported from captive-bred or farmed origin. The species is listed as near threatened by IUCN with a declining population trend. The United States is unlikely to submit a proposal for inclusion of this species in Appendix II unless significant additional information is received about the species’ biological status and trade, or a range country requests our assistance.



9) Albanian water frog (Rana shqiperica) – Inclusion in Appendix II



Defenders of Wildlife and SSN recommended that the United States propose the Albanian water frog (Rana shqiperica) for inclusion in Appendix II. This species is found in Albania, Serbia, and Montenegro in freshwater areas. It is threatened by wetland drainage, aquatic pollution, the introduction of non-native frogs, and overcollection for the commercial market. Recent U.S. trade data do not specifically show imports of this species. It is considered endangered by IUCN with declining population numbers, although IUCN indicates there is no information on the population status of the species. The United States is unlikely to submit a proposal for inclusion of this species in Appendix II at CoP15 unless significant additional information is received about the species’ biological status and trade, or a range country requests our assistance.



10) Rain frog (Scaphiophryne boribory) – Inclusion in Appendix II



Defenders of Wildlife and SSN recommended that the United States propose the rain frog (Scaphiophryne boribory) for inclusion in Appendix II. This species is found in Madagascar in large flooded areas. It is threatened by forest loss through agricultural expansion, timber harvest, charcoal production, livestock grazing, and invasive eucalyptus. IUCN indicates that the species “might be over collected” for the international pet trade. Recent U.S. import data do not specifically show imports of S. boribory, but do show imports of Scaphiophryne spp. Between 2005 and 2008, the records indicate that 183 specimens were imported to the United States, mostly for scientific purposes. All were wild-caught and originated in Madagascar. This species is considered endangered by IUCN with a declining population. We will consult with Madagascar. However, the United States is unlikely to submit a proposal for inclusion of this species in Appendix II at CoP15 unless significant additional information is received about the species’ biological status and trade, or Madagascar req!

uests our assistance.



11) Alto Verapaz salamander (Bolitoglossa dofleini) – Inclusion in Appendix II



Defenders of Wildlife and SSN recommended that the United States propose the Alto Verapaz salamander (Bolitoglossa dofleini) for inclusion in Appendix II. This species is found in Belize, Honduras, and Guatemala. It is extremely common in some areas. Chytridiomycosis is a potential threat, but has not yet been confirmed in wild populations. The international pet trade may be locally unsustainable due to slow maturation in the species (10-12 years). Between 2005 and 2008, U.S. trade data show 374 specimens, all wild-caught, imported into the United States from Honduras and Guatemala. The United States is unlikely to submit a proposal for inclusion of this species in Appendix II at CoP15 unless significant additional information is received about the species’ biological status and trade, or a range country requests our assistance.



12) Kaiser’s spotted newt (Neurergus kaiseri) – Inclusion in Appendix I or II



Defenders of Wildlife and SSN recommended that the United States propose the Kaiser’s spotted newt (Neurergus kaiseri) for inclusion in Appendix I, and TRAFFIC recommended the United States propose this species for inclusion in Appendix II. The Kaiser’s spotted newt is found in three streams in the southern Zorgo Mountains in Iran. There may be fewer than 1,000 mature individuals remaining due to dam construction and drought. Although the species has national protection, the illegal pet trade may affect the population through harvesting of mature individuals. IUCN has listed the species as critically endangered with a declining population trend.



Recent U.S. import data do not specifically show imports of N. kaiseri, but do show that, between 2005 and 2008, the United States imported 82 specimens of Neurergus spp., all of which were reported to be captive-bred in Europe. Citing TRAFFIC North America (2006), the proponents note that, in December 2004, 50 specimens were announced for sale via internet websites, and a European dealer allegedly traded approximately 200 specimens early in 2005 and claimed 250 more would be available in January 2006. Whether the specimens were wild-caught, captive-bred, or a mislabeled similar species is unclear. While there is no direct evidence that the species is traded either legally or illegally, the wild population is so small that trade in wild-caught specimens could constitute a major threat. The United States will consult with Iran. However, the United States is unlikely to submit a proposal for inclusion of this species in Appendix I or Appendix II at CoP15 unless additional info!

rmation is received about

the species’ biological status and trade, or Iran requests our assistance.



13) Kurdistan newt (Neurergus microspilotus) – Inclusion in Appendix II



Defenders of Wildlife and SSN recommended that the United States propose the Kurdistan newt (Neurergus microspilotus) for inclusion in Appendix II. It is found in four streams in the Avroman Mountains on the shared border of Iraq, Iran, and Turkey. The primary habitat, the Zagrosian oak forest, is generally protected through national legislation in Iran. The species is common in suitable habitat, but is threatened by agrochemical pollution and, possibly, the illegal pet trade. Recent U.S. import data do not specifically show imports of N. microspilotus, but, between 2005 and 2008, the records indicate that the United States imported 82 specimens of Neurergus spp., all of which were reported to be captive-bred in Europe. The species is listed as endangered by IUCN with a declining population trend. While there is no direct evidence that the species is traded either legally or illegally, the wild population is so small that trade in wild-caught specimens could constitute a maj!

or threat. The United States will consult with the range countries. However, the United States is unlikely to submit a proposal for inclusion of this species in Appendix II at CoP15 unless additional information is received about the species’ biological status and trade, or a range country requests our assistance.





Reptiles



1) Alligator snapping turtle (Macrochelys temminckii) – Inclusion in Appendix II



The IUCN/SSC Tortoise and Freshwater Turtle Specialist Group recommended that the United States propose the alligator snapping turtle (Macrochelys temminckii) for inclusion in Appendix II. In addition to concerns about direct take for export, the Group was concerned that the harvest of adult breeding stock from the wild to supply commercial farming operations may significantly impact wild populations. The alligator snapping turtle is found only in the United States. It occurs primarily in freshwater river systems and associated fluvial habitats in the following 15 States: Alabama, Arkansas, Florida, Georgia, Illinois, Indiana (likely extirpated), Iowa (likely extirpated), Kansas (no evidence of a viable breeding population), Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas. The alligator snapping turtle is large, heavy, and long lived. In addition to the capture of live young for the pet trade, adult turtles are harvested for consumption.



This species is protected in some manner by the majority of States within the species’ distribution. However, levels of protection and conservation measures vary from State to State. The total population size is unknown, but presumably is at least a few thousand and likely exceeds 10,000 individuals. Substantial to moderate population declines have been reported throughout its range. The United States included the alligator snapping turtle in Appendix III on June 14, 2006. Recent trade data (2006 and 2007) indicate that the United States exports about 31,000 live specimens a year. Currently, we are monitoring trade in the species under the Appendix-III listing, assessing the effectiveness of the Appendix-III listing, and working with the States to ensure conservation of the species. Therefore, the United States is unlikely to submit a proposal for inclusion of this species in Appendix II at CoP15 unless significant additional information is received about the species’ biolog!

ical status and trade.



2) Map turtles (Graptemys spp.) – Inclusion in Appendix II



There are 12 species of North American map turtles (Graptemys spp.). Map turtles are popular in the pet trade and may also be sold for human consumption. Map turtles are protected to varying degrees by State laws within the United States. Two species of map turtles are protected under the ESA. The United States included map turtles in Appendix III on June 14, 2006. Recent trade data (2006 and 2007) indicate that the United States exports about 210,000 live specimens a year. Currently we are monitoring trade in these species under the Appendix-III listing, assessing the effectiveness of the Appendix-III listing, and working with the States to ensure conservation of these species. Therefore, the United States is unlikely to submit a proposal for inclusion of these species in Appendix II at CoP15 unless significant additional information is received about the species’ biological status and trade.



In addition to the taxa listed above, Defenders of Wildlife and SSN suggested that more research be done on Limnonectes spp. frogs and the Laos wart newt (Paramesotriton laoensis). We need additional biological and trade information for both taxa to determine whether they meet the listing criteria in CITES Resolution Conf. 9.24 (Rev. CoP14). The IUCN categorizes Limnonectes spp. from least concern to endangered, depending upon the species. The U.S. trade data for 2005 to 2008 indicate that 2,391 specimens were imported into the United States, mostly for scientific purposes. Paramesotriton laoensis is categorized by IUCN as data deficient. It was recently described in two zones in Laos, where it appears to be common. The U.S. trade data do not specifically identify this species. However, for 2005 to 2008, 23,250 specimens of Paramesotriton spp. were imported into the United States. Most of these specimens were reported to be captive-bred from Hong Kong or Canada (17,916) and !

imported for scientific purposes. Whether or not the species that is found in Laos is in trade is unknown. The United States supports the collection of additional information by the range countries.





REQUEST FOR INFORMATION AND COMMENTS



We invite any information and comments concerning any of the possible CoP15 species proposals and proposed resolutions, decisions, and agenda items discussed above. You must submit your information and comments to us no later than the date specified in “DATES” above, to ensure that we consider them. Comments and materials received will be available for public inspection, by appointment, from 8 a.m. to 4 p.m., Monday through Friday, at either the Division of Management Authority or the Division of Scientific Authority. Our practice is to make comments, including names and home addresses of respondents, available for public review during regular business hours. Individual respondents may request that we withhold their home addresses from the administrative record, which we will honor to the extent allowable by law. There also may be circumstances in which we would withhold from the administrative record a respondent’s identity, as allowable by law. If you wish to withhold your!

name and/or address, you must state this prominently at the beginning of your comment. We will make all comments and materials submitted by organizations or businesses, and by individuals identifying themselves as representatives or officials of organizations or businesses, available for public inspection in their entirety.



ADDRESSES:



COMMENTS PERTAINING TO PROPOSED RESOLUTIONS, DECISIONS, AND AGENDA ITEMS should be sent to the Division of Management Authority, U.S.

Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Room 212, Arlington, VA 22203, or via e-mail at: CoP15@fws.gov, or via fax at: 703–358–2298. Comments pertaining to species proposals should be sent to the Division of Scientific Authority, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, 4401 North Fairfax Drive, Room 110, Arlington, VA 22203, or via e-mail at: scientificauthority@fws.gov, or via fax at: 703–358–2276.



FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PERTAINING TO RESOLUTIONS, DECISIONS, AND AGENDA ITEMS contact: Robert R. Gabel, Chief, Division of Management Authority, phone 703– 358–2095, fax 703–358–2298, e-mail: CoP15@fws.gov. For information pertaining to species proposals contact:

Rosemarie Gnam, Chief, Division of Scientific Authority, phone 703–358– 1708, fax 703–358–2276, e-mail: scientificauthority@fws.gov.



DEADLINE IS 9/11/09 FOR COMMENTS AND ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.





FUTURE ACTIONS



We expect the CITES Secretariat to provide us with a provisional agenda for CoP15 within the next several months. Once we receive the provisional agenda, we will publish it in a Federal Register notice and provide the Secretariat’s website URL. We will also provide the provisional agenda on our website at http://www.fws.gov/international.

The United States will submit any species proposals, and proposed resolutions, decisions, and agenda items for consideration at CoP15 to the CITES Secretariat 150 days prior to the start of the meeting (i.e., tentatively by mid-October 2009). We will consider all available information and comments, including those received in writing during the comment period, as we decide which species proposals, and proposed resolutions, decisions, and agenda items warrant submission by the United States for consideration by the Parties. Approximately 4 months prior to CoP15, we will post on our website an announcement of the species proposals, and proposed resolutions, decisions, and agenda items submitted by the United States to the CITES Secretariat for consideration at CoP15.

Through an additional notice and website posting in advance of CoP15, we will inform you about preliminary negotiating positions on resolutions, decisions, and amendments to the Appendices proposed by other Parties for consideration at CoP15. We will also publish an announcement of a public meeting tentatively to be held approximately 2 months prior to CoP15, to receive public input on our positions regarding items submitted by other Parties.



HerpDigest Inc. is a non-profit, 501 (c) (3), corporation that publishes the electronic weekly newsletter called HerpDigest and runs the website under the URL www.herpdigest.org



The editor reserves all rights to decide what should be included in these publications. Publication does not indicate endorsement or accuracy of any article or book included, sold or mentioned. It is up to the reader to make that determination. All copyrighted material is rewritten or excerpted to pass the fair use law or permission has been given for HerpDigest to use. Since the editor can't guarantee the accuracy of the articles, HD, Inc. is not liable for anything said in an article. Documented corrections of an item included in HerpDigest will be considered for posting as a "Letter to the Editor. No Back Issues are available. No issues in print are available. If you have any suggestions, articles or announcements you wish to see posted in HerpDigest please contact the editor at asalzberg@herpdigest.org __________________________________________________________________

You are receiving HerpDigest because through your own request, which was confirmed by HerpDigest by email. If you wish to stop receiving HerpDigest just contact asalzberg@herpdigest.org and your subscription will be terminated immediately ________________________________________________________________

If you have any questions or complaints please send them directly to us at asalzberg@herpdigest.org And you'll receive a response or acted on immediately.


-----
"As hard as I've tried, just can't NOT do this"

John Crickmer

[ Hide Replies ]

• CITES info from HERPDIGEST 07/18/09 - jscrick, Sat Jul 18 20:42:42 2009
• SSN worth a look - jscrick, Sun Jul 19 12:37:54 2009