The International Foundation for the Conservation of Natural Resources (IFCNR) will attend the 9th Animals Committee meeting of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) in Geneva, Switzerland, August 18 - August 21 2003. The invitation was extended by Dr. Thomas Althaus, new chairman of the key CITES committee.

Attendance is highly restricted to NGOs with proven track records of serious work within the international conservation community and the credentials of the attendee are thoroughly vetted. Only one member of a non-governmental organization (NGO) may attend at the chairman’s discretion. IFCNR has attended a variety of CITES-related functions, meetings of the Animals Committee, Joint Animals-Plants Committees meetings, conferences of the parties (COP) to CITES as well as FAO meetings dealing with issues of mutual interests between the two regulatory bodies for nearly a decade.

CITES serves as the international counterpart of the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA). As such it plays an important role in the ability of resource-reliant interests’ ability to conduct global trade in resources from plants to marine and land-based animals or even any trade that affects the habitat of endangered or threatened fauna and flora. That mission as well as its status as an international treaty with 162 signatory nations gives CITES considerable influence over international and domestic trade. International treaties take precedence over domestic laws of member nations. Therefore if a measure fails to pass the U.S. Congress or the legislative body of any member nation and is approved at CITES next COP, it becomes the law of the land for each 162 member nations bypassing the various national legislative venues.

CITES authority is growing in the area of commercial marine fisheries and aquaculture. Traditionally this area has been reserved for the International Fisheries Committee (COFI) of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO) of the United Nations. Because the prime mission of FAO/COFI is to seek a secure, sustainable, and environmentally compatible global food supply, FAO has always been viewed as sympathetic to food producing entities. CITES, on the other hand, has the perception of being friendlier to the agenda of the preservationist NGO community. Neither venue is open to corporate participation leaving global traders vulnerable to the influence of many within the NGO community that are increasingly intermingling preservation of wild resources with their espousing of anti-corporate ideologies.

Because of its attendance at both COFI and the CITES Animals Committee meetings, IFCNR has observed a growing trend among preservationist NGOs to push for “environmental taxes” levied against a variety of trade interests. The most significant is the quiet and very deliberately planned move to impose such a “tax” on shrimp aquaculture. Recently, Oceana Foundation announced it is seeking a similar levy against Chilean pelagic fisheries within that country, a move that telegraphs not only that NGO’s intent to next seek such a tax against salmon farms there but also that all fisheries are on the NGO menu for similar measures at the international measure.

Indications are that the World Wide Fund for Nature/World Wildlife Fund (WWF) will broach the idea of a shrimp farm tax among delegates at the Animals Committee meetings in Geneva this summer.

Once such a precedent is set for marine species, terrestrial environmental taxes are sure to follow for timber, mining, even agricultural products that affect wild habitat via pesticides, deforestation or water diversion.

Contrary to the NGO ideology that seeks to penalize trade and traders for environmental losses whether they are responsible or not, the concept of sustainable use as espoused by IFCNR holds that the key to truly sustainable conservation of wild resources is the inclusion, not exclusion of ethical traders and local cultures and nations in an ethical and environmentally friendly system where the conservation needs of wild resources and human cultures can be met and funded through the economic benefits that accrue from world trade. In a universe where governments are strapped for funds to pay for their own services and charities provide at best temporary relief, ethical corporate global traders offer the only sound and sustainable source for funding necessary both to preserve wildlife and wild places and create economic conditions that eliminate poverty and hunger, the two biggest chronic causes of environmental degradation.

FAO’s mission is to protect the global food supply while that of CITES’ is to protect wild resources. Both seek environmental compatibility in achieving their objectives and both rely on NGOs for support in research, field work and more. Similarly neither venue is open to corporate participation. Because non-use NGOs see CITES as vital to imposing their agenda on the way the world conducts its affairs, it is imperative that NGOs with credibility and histories of significant contributions subscribing to the view point of sustainable use attend FAO and CITES working sessions. Which is precisely the reason IFCNR’s attendance at CITES’ Animals Committee is of such importance.