CITES

2013
YEAR

OF THE

SHARK

PHOTO: JIM ABERNETHY

CITES

2013
YEAR

OF THE

SHARK

An Appendix II listing regulates international

trade in species that are overexploited, and may become
threatened if their trade is not effectively regulated. It
does not constitute a trade ban or affect use of a species
within national jurisdiction. Domestic fishery management
measures and decisions are unaffected under this listing.
Appendix II allows international trade but gives depleted
or overexploited species a chance to recover by permitting
only sustainable and legal trade.

THE ECOLOGICAL AND ECONOMIC

VALUE OF SHARKS
Sharks are worth more alive than dead.
Tourism involving sharks, such as recreational diving or
snorkeling with sharks, is typically more sustainable and
often more lucrative than shark fishing and trade. For
example, the estimated lifetime value of a live reef shark
to the tourism industry in Palau is US$1.9 million, while the
same reef shark is worth US$108 if caught and killed.
Ocean health depends on sharks.
Sharks help maintain balance in marine ecosystems. When
their populations decline, unpredictable consequences in
the ocean environment may result, including the possible
collapse of commercially important fisheries.

PHOTO: DAVID BURDICK/NOAA

Scalloped hammerhead shark

(Sphyrna lewini)

PHOTO: C&M FALLOWS/OCEANWIDEIMAGES.COM

n Scalloped hammerheads are found along

coastlines in warm, temperate waters of
the Atlantic, Pacific, and Indian Oceans.

n Scientists have estimated that 1.3 million

to 2.7 million scalloped and smooth
hammerheads are killed annually for the
fin trade.9

Scalloped hammerhead and great

hammerhead sharks are assessed as
Endangered, and smooth hammerhead
sharks are Vulnerable globally.

vulnerable

endangered

Porbeagle shark
(Lamna nasus)

n Porbeagles, closely related to the great

white shark, range along coasts and into
international waters. They are found
in cold-temperate waters of the north
Atlantic and southern hemisphere.

n Porbeagle meat is considered high

quality, particularly in Europe, notably
France, Spain and Italy. Porbeagle ns are
also in demand for shark fin soup in Asia.

The porbeagle is assessed as

Vulnerable globally, Endangered in
the northwest Atlantic, and Critically
Endangered in the northeast
Atlantic and the Mediterranean.

vulnerable

CE

critically endangered

endangered

PHOTO: DOUG PERRINE/SEAPICS.COM

Oceanic whitetip shark

(Carcharhinus longimanus)

PHOTO: JIM ABERNETHY

n Although the oceanic whitetip is one

of the most widespread shark species,
found in tropical and temperate seas
throughout the world, it is also one of
the most threatened.

n Scientists have estimated that 250,000

to 1.3 million oceanic whitetip sharks are
killed globally per year for the fin trade.25

Oceanic whitetip sharks are assessed

as Vulnerable globally and Critically
Endangered in the northwest and
western central Atlantic.

vulnerable

CE

critically endangered

Manta ray
(Genus Manta)

n The oceanic manta ray (Manta birostris)

is found around the world in tropical
and temperate waters; the reef manta
(M. alfredi) is found in tropical and subtropical waters of the Pacific, Atlantic and
Indian Oceans.

n It is estimated that gill plates from

more than 4,000 manta rays are traded
annually for use in Asia in a purported
health tonic.40

Both the oceanic manta ray and reef

manta ray are assessed as Vulnerable.

vulnerable

PHOTO: JEFF ROTMAN

proposal 43 VOTE YES!

PHOTO: CHRIS NEWBERT/MINDEN PICTURES/NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC STOCK

> Scalloped Hammerhead

Sponsored by Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, the Member States of the European Union, Ecuador,
Honduras and Mexico
Fisheries surveys in the northwest Atlantic have
documented hammerhead loss of up to 98 percent,3
landings in the southwest Atlantic have declined
by up to 90 percent,4 and declines of more than
99 percent have occurred in some parts of the
Mediterranean Sea.5

The smooth hammerhead shark (Sphyrna zygaena)

and great hammerhead shark (Sphyrna mokarran)
are listed as look-alike species in the scalloped
hammerhead proposal.

Species Information
The scalloped hammerhead shark (Sphyrna lewini),
one of the most recognizable shark species with
its hammer-shaped head, is also one of the most
endangered.

Management and Trade

Although their distinctive body shape makes
hammerheads easy to identify as a genus, it can

The scalloped hammerhead is subject to targeted

fisheries, illegal fishing, and fishery bycatch
throughout the world. It is exploited primarily to
satisfy a growing global demand for its fins, which
are some of the most valuable in the fin trade.1
Hammerheads frequently aggregate in large
numbers, which makes them even more vulnerable
to fishing efforts.2 As a result, they are assessed
on the International Union for the Conservation of
Nature (IUCN) Red List of Threatened Species as
Endangered globally and the United Nations Food
and Agriculture Organization (FAO) assigns them to
the lowest-productivity category, meaning that they
have an extremely low reproductive capacity and are
one of the oceans most vulnerable species.
PHOTO: JONATHAN BIRD/SEAPICS.COM

HAMMERHEAD

be difficult to distinguish scalloped hammerheads

from the similar-looking smooth (S. zygaena) and
great (S. mokarran) hammerheads, especially
when looking only at fins. Species-specific data
are limited, but market-based scientific inquiries
have yielded important trade information.6 Dealers
have stated that hammerhead fins are some of the
most valuable.7 The three hammerhead species
combined make up approximately six percent
of the identified fins entering the Hong Kong
market.8 From this information, scientists have
estimated that 1.3 million to 2.7 million scalloped
and smooth hammerheads are exploited for the
fin trade every year.9 A few countries and only
one regional fisheries management organization
(RFMO) have conservation or management
measures for hammerheads, but RFMOs do not
regulate international trade.10 According to a 2008
assessment of illegal, unreported, and unregulated
fishing, hammerheads are among the shark species
that are most often fished illegally.11

PHOTO: Shawn HEINRICHS/Blue Sphere Media

Benefits of a CITES Listing

A proposal to include scalloped hammerheads
in Appendix II was submitted at CoP15 and was
endorsed by the FAO, the CITES Secretariat, and
TRAFFIC/IUCN. However, at that time, the proposal
narrowly missed being adopted.
Although the recent inclusion of scalloped
hammerhead sharks on CITES Appendix III is
a positive step, an Appendix II listing is vital to
ensuring that hammerhead sharks are protected
throughout their range from overexploitation
due to international trade. A CITES Appendix II
listing for scalloped hammerheads would greatly
improve the future health of populations by
regulating international commerce in their products,
ensuring trade occurs only from sustainable and
legal fisheries, and enhancing data-reporting and
enforcement efforts.

In September 2012, the scalloped hammerhead

was included in CITES Appendix III. Appendix III
requires that an export permit be issued for parts
and products exported from the country that
included the species in Appendix III (Costa Rica and
Australia in this case). All other countries must issue
a certificate of origin showing that it is not from the
country that listed the species; but other scientific
findings are not required.

proposal 44 VOTE YES!

PHOTO: DOUG PERRINE/SEAPICS.COM

> Porbeagle Shark

Sponsored by Brazil, Comoros, Croatia, the Member States of the European Union and Egypt

Species Information
The large, warm-blooded porbeagle shark (Lamna
nasus) is distributed throughout the temperate
north Atlantic and southern hemisphere.
Populations of the porbeagle have been severely
depleted around the globe. The International
Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN)
Red List of Threatened Species assessed the
porbeagle as Vulnerable globally, Endangered in
the northwest Atlantic and Critically Endangered
in the Mediterranean and northeast Atlantic. The
porbeagle falls into the United Nations Food
and Agriculture Organizations (FAO) lowestproductivity category, meaning it has an extremely
low reproductive capacity and thus is particularly
vulnerable to overexploitation. It is also one of the
oceans most vulnerable species.

PHOTO: DOUG PERRINE/SEAPICS.COM

Porbeagle populations are reduced by about 70

percent of their historical levels wherever they
are found, and in some places declines are even
steeper.14 For example, porbeagles have virtually
disappeared in the Mediterranean Sea.15

Management and Trade

This species yields significant commercial value for

both its large fins and its meat and is taken in both
targeted and bycatch fisheries.12 The international
demand for porbeagle meat and fins has driven
populations to very low levels across its range.
Recent assessments show that because porbeagle
populations have been severely depleted, it is
unable to fulfill its key role in the marine ecosystem.13

Although management has improved within some of

the porbeagles range because of domestic fisheries
measures, such as a management plan in Canadian
waters and a retention prohibition in the European
Union, almost no international conservation or
management measures for the species are in place
on the high seas (areas beyond national jurisdiction).

A proposal to include the porbeagle in CITES

Appendix II was proposed at the 15th meeting of the
Conference of the Parties (CoP15) and was endorsed
by the FAO, the CITES Secretariat, and TRAFFIC/
IUCN. However, at that time, the proposal very
narrowly missed being adopted. A new Appendix
II proposal has been submitted by the EU Member
States, Brazil, Comoros, Croatia, and Egypt for
consideration by the Parties at CoP16. It is clear from
continued assessments that the population has not
recovered, and further analysis shows it is in a worse
state globally than in 2010, while international trade
is still significant. Although the recent inclusion of
porbeagle sharks on CITES Appendix III is a positive
step, an Appendix II listing is vital to ensuring that
they are managed throughout their range to prevent
overexploitation due to international trade. A CITES
Appendix II listing of the porbeagle is scientifically
justified and essential to ensuring that international
trade occurs only from fisheries that are legal and
sustainable and that trade data are recorded.

In late 2012, the porbeagle was included in CITES

Appendix III. The listing requires that an export
permit be issued for wildlife products exported from
the country that included the species in Appendix
III. In this case, 20 of the 27 EU Member States and
Australia, that included the species in Appendix
III need to issue export permits. All other CITES
Parties are required to issue a certificate of origin
confirming that the specimen is not from the country
that included the species in Appendix III, but other
scientific findings are not required.

porbeagle

Benefits of a CITES Listing

The North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission

(NEAFC) has prohibited the targeting and retention
of porbeagle sharks,16 but the International
Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas
(ICCAT) has still failed to act; within the porbeagles
southern range, there are no conservation or
management measures on the high seas whatsoever.
This adds up to huge areas where the porbeagle
has no protection. Because the species is extremely
vulnerable to both targeted shark longline fisheries
and bycatch throughout its range, further depletion
is likely to render this species at risk of extinction.
Even where retention is prohibited, such as in the
EU and in NEAFCs area, enforcement and
compliance are often weak and significant levels
of mortality remain.

proposal 42 VOTE YES!

PHOTO: BRIAN SKERRY/NATIONAL GEOGRAPHIC STOCK

> Oceanic Whitetip Shark

Sponsored by Brazil, Colombia, United States

Species Information

Atlantic, an analysis showed declines of up to 70

percent since 1992.18 A similar analysis in the Pacific

The oceanic whitetip (Carcharhinus longimanus)

is an open-ocean species with a distinctive white
tip on its dorsal fin. Although it is one of the most
widespread shark species, found throughout the
worlds tropical and temperate seas, it is also one of
the most threatened.

estimated a 90 percent decline in biomass.19 Most

recently, a 2012 stock assessment in the western
and central Pacific Ocean determined that oceanic
whitetip sharks were overfished and that overfishing
is occurring.20
Several targeted fisheries exist for oceanic whitetips,
which are also frequently caught as bycatch in tuna
and swordfish fisheries.21 Although this species
experiences a high catch-survival rate on longline
fishing gear and could be released alive,22 the low

Oceanic whitetip sharks have experienced significant

population declines due largely to overexploitation
fueled by a global demand for their large, highly
valued fins. They are assessed by the International
Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red
List of Threatened Species as critically endangered
in the northwest and western central Atlantic Ocean
and as vulnerable globally. In addition, the oceanic
whitetip falls into the United Nations Food and
Agriculture Organizations (FAO) lowest productivity
category, meaning that it has an extremely low
reproductive capacity, making it particularly
vulnerable to overexploitation. It is also one of the
oceans most vulnerable species.
Several scientific studies document the drastic
decline in this sharks populations. One population
study in the Gulf of Mexico estimated a drop of 99
percent in just four generations.17 In the northwest

PHOTO: JIM ABERNETHY

Oceanic whitetip fins are easily identified

in trade by the white tips, rounded shape, and
large size, making them one of the most distinctive
products in the shark fin trade. Identification of
these unprocessed fins can be done by visual
observation alone, with a DNA study of fins showing
that fin traders can identify oceanic whitetip fins
with 100 percent accuracy.23 These sharks make
up approximately 1.8 percent of the identified
fins entering the Hong Kong market.24 From this
information, scientists have estimated that 250,000
to 1.3 million oceanic whitetips are killed worldwide
per year for the fin trade.25

Benefits of a CITES Listing

A proposal to include the species in Appendix II was
proposed at the 15th meeting of the Conference of
the Parties (CoP15) and was endorsed by the FAO,
the CITES Secretariat, and TRAFFIC/IUCN. However,
at that time, the proposal was narrowly rejected.
Although RFMOs have taken some conservation
and management actions since CoP15, huge
gaps in regulations remain, and enforcement and
compliance are limited.

Oceanic whitetips are receiving some protection

through recently agreed conservation and
management measures by some regional fisheries
management organizations (RFMOs). But these
measures do not extend to the full range of the
species, nor do they regulate international trade.
Furthermore, these measures apply only to oceanic
whitetip sharks taken in the specific fisheries
covered by those particular RFMOs and only
to the governments that are members of those
RFMOs. Three regional fisheries management

Including oceanic whitetips in CITES Appendix II will

help States enforce their domestic prohibitions and
help contracting Parties to relevant RFMOs ensure
compliance with existing management measures.
An Appendix II listing is scientifically justified and
essential to ensure that trade occurs only from legal
and sustainable fisheries, and it would help facilitate
data collection across the species range.

whitetip

organizationsthe International Commission for the

Conservation of Atlantic Tunas, the Inter-American
Tropical Tuna Commission, and the Western
and Central Pacific Fisheries Commissionhave
prohibited the retention onboard, transshipment,
and landing of oceanic whitetip sharks within
their fisheries.

market value of its meat coupled with the high value

of its fins often leads fishermen to instead remove
the fins at sea and dispose of the carcass overboard.

proposal 46 VOTE YES!

PHOTO: GUY STEVENS

> Manta Rays

Sponsored by Brazil, Colombia, Ecuador

Manta rays are assessed on the International Union

for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) Red List of
Threatened Species as Vulnerable globally. Manta
rays bear only one pup on average every two to
three years, which makes them highly vulnerable
to overexploitation.29, 30 They are killed as bycatch
and in targeted fisheries throughout the Atlantic,
Pacific, and Indian Oceans. In recent years, manta
ray fishing has expanded in many places throughout
their range, primarily in response to the emerging
international market for their gill plates.

Species Information
The oceanic manta (Manta birostris) and the reef
manta rays (M. alfredi) are among the oceans most
charismatic wildlife. Manta rays are typically found
in tropical and subtropical waters, although oceanic
manta rays can be found in temperate waters. With
oceanic and reef mantas reaching up to 9 meters26
and 5 meters27, respectively, these gentle giants have
enormous ecotourism value.28

Manta ray gill plates, which are sold in some Asian

markets in a tonic with purported health benefits,
are the part most valued in international trade, with
cartilage and skins of lesser importance.31 Population
depletion for oceanic and reef mantas is high in
several regions, with declines by more than 85
percent of the population baseline.32, 33 Alarmingly,
enormous local declines have occurred over one
generation or less in areas with targeted fisheries.34,
35, 36
For example, annual landings of manta rays in
Indonesia declined by 56 percent in nine years.37
In Mozambique, sightings of Manta alfredi declined
by 86 percent during eight years in which the
fishery expanded.38

PHOTO: GUY STEVENS

10

rays

Management and Trade

The top three manta fishing countriesIndonesia,
Sri Lanka, and Indiaaccount for an estimated
90 percent of the worlds manta catch and target
mantas for their gill plates.39 Commerce in gill
plates is not well-documented, although an
estimate of the total volume of the gill plate trade
has been produced from an analysis of market
surveys in the major manta ray gill plate markets:
Guangzhou, Hong Kong, and Macau in China, as
well as Singapore, with an estimated 99 percent
of the market based in Guangzhou. These surveys
estimated the annual volume of gill plate sales as
about 21,000 kilograms (46,300 pounds) of dried
manta ray gill plates and representing an estimated
4,652 manta rays.40 Virtually no management exists

PHOTO: GUY STEVENS

Benefits of a CITES Listing

Although a number of countries, including Parties
to the CMS, have started to take steps to address
the decline in manta ray populations, these
measures do not regulate international trade in
manta products, do not have the global reach
of CITES, and often cover only one of the two
described species of manta. An Appendix II listing
for the genus Manta is necessary to ensure that
international trade does not continue to threaten
the survival of these species.

of the international trade in manta products.

Several countriesincluding Ecuador, the Maldives,
Mexico, New Zealand, and the Philippineshave
put in place domestic measures to protect manta
rays. In addition, the oceanic manta was listed
in Appendixes I and II of the Convention on the
Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals
(CMS) in 2011. This means that the 116 Parties
to the CMS are required to work to enforce strict
protections for these animals, including a prohibition
on take, as well as to conserve or restore the habitats
in which they live, mitigate obstacles to migration,
and control other factors that might further
endanger the species. Despite the fact that mantas
are caught as bycatch in some regional fisheries
management organization (RFMO) fisheries, no
RFMO has adopted measures to specifically protect
or regulate landings of manta.

A proposal to include the genus Manta in CITES

Appendix II was submitted for consideration at
the 16th meeting of the Conference of the Parties
(CoP16) in 2013, by Brazil, Colombia and Ecuador.
It is clear from recent assessments that populations
are severely depleted and that international trade
is driving the declines. An Appendix II listing
would regulate international trade to ensure it
is sustainable and legal, and would thus help
populations to recover from decline.

11

endnotes
SCALLOPED HAMMERHEAD

OCEANIC WHITETIP

Chapman, D.D., D. Pinhal, and M.S. Shivji, Tracking the fin trade: Genetic stock
identification in western Atlantic scalloped hammerhead sharks Sphyrna lewini,
Endangered Species Research, 9:221-228 (2009), www.int-res.com/articles/esr2009/9/
n009p221.pdf.

17 Baum, J.K., and R.A. Myers, Shifting baselines and the decline of pelagic sharks
in the Gulf of Mexico, Ecology Letters, 7(3):135-45 (2004), www.fmap.ca/ramweb/
papers-total/Baum_Myers_2004.pdf.

Baum, J., et al., 2007. Sphyrna lewini. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened
Species. Version 2012.1. www.iucnredlist.org. Downloaded Aug. 2, 2012.

18 Baum, J.K., et al., Collapse and conservation of shark populations in the

Northwest Atlantic, Science, 299:389-92 (2003), www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/
full/299/5605/389.

Myers, R.A., et al., Cascading effects of the loss of apex predatory sharks from a
coastal ocean, Science, 30 315:184650 (March 2007), www.sciencemag.org/cgi/
content/abstract/315/5820/1846.

19 Ward, P., and R. Myers, Shifts in open ocean fish communities coinciding with the
commencement of commercial fishing, Ecology, 86:835-47 (2005), www.fmap.ca/
ramweb/papers-total/Ward_Myers_2004_Ecology.pdf.

Vooren, C.M., et al., Biologia e status conservao dos tubaro-martelo Sphyrna

lewini e S. zygaena, pp. 97-112. In: C.M. Vooren and S. Klippel (eds.), Aes para a
conservao detubares e raias no sul do Brasil. Igar, Porto Alegre (2005).

Ferretti, F., et al., Loss of large predatory sharks from the Mediterranean Sea,
Conservation Biology, 22:952-96 (2008), http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/
j.1523-1739.2008.00938.x/pdf.

20 Rice, J., and S. Harley, Stock assessment of oceanic whitetip sharks in the western
and central Pacific Ocean, Western and Central Pacific Fisheries Commission
Scientific Committee, Busan, South Korea, Aug. 7-15, 2012, www.wcpfc.int/system/
files/documents/meetings/scientific-committee/8th-regular-session/stock-statustheme/working-papers/SA-WP-06-Oceanic-Whitetip-Stock-Assessent-WCPO-Rev-1%283-August-2012%29.pdf.

Clarke, S. Use of shark fin trade data to estimate historic total shark removals in
the Atlantic Ocean, Aquatic Living Resources, 21:373-81 (2008), http://journals.
cambridge.org/action/displayFulltext?type=1&fid=8207805&jid=ALR&volumeId=21&
issueId=04&aid=8207803&bodyId=&membershipNumber=&societyETOCSession=.

Abercrombie, D.L., S.C. Clarke, and M.S. Shivji, Global-scale genetic identification of
hammerhead sharks: Application to assessment of the international fin trade and law
enforcement, Conservation Genetics, 6:775-788 (2005), www.nova.edu/ocean/ghri/
forms/abercrombie05.pdf.

23 Clarke, S.C. , et al., Identification of shark species composition and proportion in

the Hong Kong shark fin market based on molecular genetics and trade records,
Conservation Biology, 20(1):201-11 (2006a), www3.interscience.wiley.com/cgi-bin/
fulltext/118564070/PDFSTART.

Clarke, S.C., et al., Global estimates of shark catches using trade records from
commercial markets, Ecology Letters, 9:111526, (2006a), http://137.52.224.90/
ocean/ghri/forms/clarke06.pdf.

24 Ibid.

21 Baum et al., (2003).

22 Beerkircher, L.R. , et al., Characteristics of shark bycatch observed on pelagic
longlines off the southeastern United States, 19922000, Marine Fisheries Review,
64(4):40-9 (2002), http://spo.nwr.noaa.gov/mfr644/mfr6443.pdf.

25 Clarke, S.C. , et al., Global estimates of shark catches using trade records from
commercial markets, Ecology Letters, 9:1115-26, (2006b), http://137.52.224.90/
ocean/ghri/forms/clarke06.pdf.

Clarke, S.C., et al., Identification of shark species composition and proportion in

the Hong Kong shark fin market based on molecular genetics and trade records,
Conservation Biology 20(1):201-11 (2006b), http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/
doi/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2005.00247.x/abstract.

MANTA RAY
26 Marshall, A.D., L.J.V. Compagno, and M.B. Bennett, Redescription of the genus
Manta with resurrection of Manta alfredi (Krefft, 1868) (Chondrichthyes: Myliobatoidei:
Mobulidae), Zootaxa, 2301:1-28 (2009).

10 International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas,

Recommendation by ICCAT on hammerhead sharks (Family Sphyrnidae) caught
in association with fisheries managed by ICCAT, 10-08 (2010), www.iccat.es/
Documents%5CRecs%5Ccompendiopdf-e%5C2010-08-e.pdf.

27 Marshall, A.D., et al., Manta alfredi. In: IUCN 2011. IUCN Red List of Threatened
Species, Version 2011.2 (2011a), www.iucnredlist.org. Downloaded Aug. 31, 2012.

PORBEAGLE

28 Heinrichs, S., et al., Manta ray of hope: Global threat to manta and mobula rays.
Manta Ray of Hope Project (2011), www.mantarayofhope.com/downloads/TheGlobal-Threat-to-Manta-and-Mobula-Rays.pdf.

11 Lack, M., and G. Sant, Illegal, unreported and unregulated shark catch: A review
of current knowledge and action, Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage
and the Arts and TRAFFIC, Canberra, www.traffic.org/species-reports/traffic_species_
fish30.pdf.

29 Homma, K., et al., Biology of the manta ray, Manta birostris, Walbaum, in the IndoPacific. In: Seret, B., and Sire, J.Y. (eds.), Indo-Pacific fish biology: Proceedings of the
5th International Conference on Indo-Pacific Fishes, Noumea, 1997. Ichthyological
Society of France, Paris, pp. 209-216 (1999).

12 Stevens, J., et al., Lamna nasus. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened
Species. Version 2012.1 (2006), www.iucnredlist.org. Downloaded Aug. 31, 2012.
13 Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO), Potential socio-economic implications of
adding porbeagle shark to the list of wildlife species at risk in the Species at Risk Act
(SARA), DFO Policy and Economics BranchMaritimes Region, Dartmouth,
Nova Scotia (2006), www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/species-especes/reports-rapports/
porbeagle-maraiche/index-eng.htm.

30 Marshall, et al., (2009).

14 International Commission for the Conservation of Atlantic Tunas/International Council

for the Exploration of the Sea, Report of the 2009 porbeagle stock assessments
meeting (Copenhagen, June 22-27, 2009), www.iccat.int/Documents/Meetings/
Docs/2009_POR_ASSESS_ENG.pdf.

33 Marshall, A., et al., Manta birostris. In: IUCN 2011. IUCN Red List of Threatened
Species. Version 2011.2 (2011b), www.iucnredlist.org. Downloaded Aug. 31, 2012.

31 Heinrichs et al., (2011).

32 Marshall, et al. (2011a).

34 Dewar, H., Preliminary report: Manta harvest in Lamakera. Report from the Pfleger
Institute of Environmental Research and the Nature Conservancy (2002).

15 Ferretti, F., et al., Loss of large predatory sharks from the Mediterranean Sea,
Conservation Biology, 22:952-964 (2008), http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/
j.1523-1739.2008.00938.x/pdf.

35 White, W.T., et al., Mobula japonica. In: IUCN 2012. IUCN Red List of Threatened
Species. Version 2012.1 (2006). www.iucnredlist.org. Downloaded Sept. 4, 2012.
36 Alava, E.R.Z., et al., Fishery and trade of whale sharks and manta rays in the Bohol
Sea, Philippines. In: S.L. Fowler, T.M. Reed, and F.A. Dipper (eds.), Elasmobranch
biodiversity, conservation and management: Proceedings of the International Seminar
and Workshop. Sabah, Malaysia, July 1997, pp. 132-148 (2002).

16 North East Atlantic Fisheries Commission, Porbeagle, Recommendation 6: 2012,

www.neafc.org/system/files/Rec_6_Recommendation_porbeagle.pdf.

37 Dewar (2002).
38 Rohner et al., in review.
39 Ibid.
40 Heinrichs et al., (2011). http://www.sharksavers.org/files/9013/3184/4869/The_
Global_Threat_to_Manta_and_Mobula_Rays.pdf, Townsend et al. in prep. http://
www.cites.org/common/cop/16/prop/raw/CoP16-Prop-EC-Manta.pdf.

Contact: international@pewtrusts.org
Philadelphia, Pa. 19103
Tel. +1 (215)575-9050

Washington, D.C. 20004

Tel. +1 (202)552-2000

1050 Brussels, Belgium

Tel. +32 (0)2 274 1620
12

London WC1 HBY, UK

Tel. +44 (0)20 7388 5370

Appendix II-Listed Species: The Key to Sustainable Trade

What does Appendix II really mean? Debunking the myths:
CITES Appendix II includes species that, though not necessarily threatened with
extinction, may become so unless trade is subjected to strict regulation.
To ensure that an Appendix II listing is successful in preventing a species from
reaching a level at which an Appendix I listing is necessary, the extent of removals
from the wild and international trade must not be detrimental to the species survival
or its role in an ecosystem.
According to this requirement, States must certify that trade in CITES-listed species
is sustainable, through the following procedures:
The Scientific Authority (SA) of each Party to the Convention shall monitor the
export permits granted for Appendix II species and the actual exports of such
specimens from that State.
To obtain an export permit, the SA of the State of export must issue a nondetriment finding, affirming that the export will not be detrimental to the survival
of that species in the wild.
If the SA determines that the export of the species should be limited to maintain
the species role in its ecosystem and its population above levels that could
make the species eligible for Appendix I, the SA shall contact the Management
Authority to institute measures to limit the number of export permits allowed
for that species. Three species of sharksgreat white, whale, and baskingare
already listed on Appendix II. Export permits for these species are granted only
after a non-detriment finding has been issued and trade is determined to be
sustainable. Additional shark species and manta rays are being proposed at the
16th meeting of the Conference of the Parties (COP16) to CITES for inclusion
in Appendix II. Adoption and implementation of these proposals will be key to
ensuring that they do not become eligible for Appendix I in the near future.

WHO WE ARE

The Pew Environment Group is the conservation arm of The Pew Charitable Trusts, a nongovernmental
organization that works globally to establish pragmatic, science-based policies that protect our oceans,
preserve our wildlands, and promote clean energy.

Contact: international@pewtrusts.org
Philadelphia, Pa. 19103
Tel. +1 (215)575-9050

1050 Brussels, Belgium

Tel. +32 (0)2 274 1620

Washington, D.C. 20004

Tel. +1 (202)552-2000

London WC1 HBY, UK

Tel. +44 (0)20 7388 5370

www.PewEnvironment.org/CITES

Printed on recycled paper using vegetable-based inks and 100% wind power.