The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species - will set a precedent, as the votes prohibit trading in a non-profit fish such as bluefin tuna.
The United States and the European Union back the proposal, but Japan is opposed.
Conservation groups are hoping for better protection of sharks, corals, polar bears, reptiles and amphibians.
Ivory and tuna are two potentially controversial issues.
International trade in ivory was banned in 1989.
But the countries that are considered well-managed stocks have elephants and reliable systems for monitoring the teeth three times been allowed to sell packages of securities.
But other African countries led by Kenya and Mali want a 20-year ban on all exports of ivory. They argue that the legal trade encourages poaching, which is increasing in recent years.
However, the organization Transportation - responsible for collecting data on illegal elephant ivory smuggling and murder - is proof that there is no evidence of a link.
Data from the Elephant Trade Information System (ETIS) shows that the rate of seizures of illegal ivory began to rise in 2004, well before the last-off sale of ivory is illegal in 2007.
And the precedent-off in sales in 1999, co-combined with the decline of the attacks.
ETI manager Tom Milliken argues that African governments want the ivory tide would do better to step up enforcement action against poachers and traders.
And China, the main market for illegal ivory, must continue to live on its promises to act against the gangs of smuggling, he said.
Otherwise, he says: "Arguments about the effects of the single sales will continue to focus away from the real issue, switching: to find a way to stop the flow of illegal ivory at the source."
The possibility of voting on the CITES ban on international trade in bluefin tuna increased significantly during the week, when - after months of disputes - the EU has decided to lend its support.
The block contains several nations with the fleet of tuna in the Mediterranean, the main motivation for fishing.
Conservation groups say the ban is necessary because the governments involved in the field has allowed overfishing to the extent that the survival of the species is in doubt.
They argue that a break in the fishery will ultimately lead to more catches.
"This is a crucial time to maintain - or the government here will vote for the conservation of tuna, or that commercial fishing interests to prevail, thus further overfishing and continuous decline of this iconic species,"
Japan has indicated that the log out of a trade ban, as it is right to do under the CITES regulations.
But, like any other nation fishing for tuna is gone with her, there would be no supply of tuna to be imported.
Conservation groups invite the European Union and the United States to ensure that other nations fishing for tuna, in particular the countries of North Africa bordering the Mediterranean Sea, not unsubscribe.
The CITES meeting will also consider a proposal by the United States' international trade in products derived from polar bears to prohibit.
Rapid melting of Arctic sea ice in recent decades has been the polar bear in the red list of endangered species.
Approximately 2,000 items are traded internationally each year, including the skin, skull, teeth and claws.
Although not considered the main threat to the species' survival, the United States considers the ban on trade would help and not violate the rights of indigenous peoples of a history of hunting polar bears and for meat skin.
Other proposals would see bans in some reptiles and amphibians, including three endangered iguanas from Mexico and seriously newt Luristan Iran.
Four species of sharks are also taken, such as red and pink corals from the Mediterranean Sea Corallium used in the trade of jewelry.
0 comments:
Post a Comment