Existing AEWA orientations. Annex 3 to the Agreement (the Action Plan) includes two items (4.3.7 and 4.3.8) that urge Parties to take appropriate actions nationally or through the framework of Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (RFMOs) and relevant international organisations to minimise the impact of fisheries on migratory waterbirds, including from bycatch. Bycatch may occur in both freshwater and marine environments, and both are considered in AEWA orientations. To date, two MOP Resolutions have focused specifically on seabirds: • Resolution 6.9 (2015) on Improving the conservation status of African-Eurasian seabirds - xxxxx://xxx.xxxx- xxxx.xxx/xx/xxxxxxxx/xxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxxxxx-xxxxxx-xxxxxxx-xxxxxxxx-xxxxxxxx-0 ; • Resolution 7.6 (2018) on Priorities for the conservation of seabirds in the African-Eurasian flyways - xxxxx://xxx.xxxx-xxxx.xxx/en/document/priorities-conservation-seabirds-african-eurasian-flyways-1 . Multilateral processes/platforms identified in these that may offer an entry-point for influencing threats from fisheries bycatch are summarised in the table below. Resolution 6.9 notes that AEWA’s priority should be those species, regions, or threats not already the subject of relevant frameworks, e.g. tropical seabirds or those impacted by small or artisanal fisheries not regulated by RFMOs. The Resolution requested the AEWA Technical Committee to advise on the most urgent priorities. Multilateral process / platform Where identified by AEWA Possible opportunity for influence ⮚ Convention on Migratory Species (CMS) CMS COP Resolution 10.14 (2011) on Bycatch of CMS-listed species in gillnet fisheries Noted in preamble of MOP Resolution 6.9 (2015) on Improving the conservation status of African- Eurasian seabirds • CMS Parties accounting for action via national reports. • Follow-up attention at future CMS COPs. CMS COP Resolution 12.22 (2017) on Bycatch of CMS-listed species Noted in preamble of MOP Resolution 7.6 (2018) on Priorities for the conservation of seabirds in the African-Eurasian flyways • CMS Parties accounting for action via national reports. • Follow-up attention at future CMS COPs. International Single Species Action Plan for the Conservation of the White-headed Duck Oxyura leucocephala – activities 2.3, 2.6, 2.7 and 5.8 address the threat of bycatch in fishing nets AEWA is joint publisher of the Action Plan (AEWA Technical Series No. 8, 2006) together with CMS and the EU, with the aim of assisting fulfilment of obligations under AEWA, CMS and t...
Existing AEWA orientations. The AEWA MOP-adopted Conservation Guidelines No. 6 (2005) on regulating trade in migratory waterbirds (xxxxx://xxx.xxxx-xxxx.xxx/en/publication/aewa-conservation-guidelines-no-6-guidelines-regulating-trade- migratory-waterbirds-ts-no ) identified some multilateral processes/platforms that may offer entry-points for influence. These and some others are summarised in the table below. Multilateral process / platform Where identified by AEWA Possible opportunity for influence ⮚ Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) Where international trade affects migratory waterbirds, CITES (via UNEP-WCMC) provides the best source of data on this problem. (Only small numbers of migratory waterbirds are affected in the AEWA area however, with domestic trade being much more significant. Data are also based only on CITES-listed species, and they exclude pre-export mortality, which may be significant). Referred to in AEWA Conservation Guidelines No. 6 (2005) on regulating trade in migratory waterbirds • Reporting and assessment of CITES implementation data. CITES Parties required to regulate trade in Appendix-listed species AEWA Conservation Guidelines No. 6 (2005) on regulating trade in migratory waterbirds recommends that States join CITES, to monitor and regulate trade in endangered and vulnerable species • Join the Convention, if not already a Party. • Mechanisms to ensure/ improve compliance. CITES species listings are dynamic, and Parties need to keep them up to date. Twelve species with the highest conservation status in the AEWA Action Plan (Category 1, Column A, Table 1) and 3 species listed in Appendix I of CMS, were not listed at the time of the 2005 Guidelines referred to here (position requires updating) Mentioned to in AEWA Conservation Guidelines No. 6 (2005) on regulating trade in migratory waterbirds • Align CITES species listings with AEWA priorities.
Existing AEWA orientations. Under Article III.2 (g) of the Agreement, Parties are required to prohibit the deliberate introduction of non- native waterbird species, to take measures to prevent the unintentional release of such species, and to take measures to prevent them becoming a threat if they have already been introduced. These obligations are elaborated further in Annex 3 (the Action Plan), in paragraphs 2.5.1, 2.5.2, 2.5.3, 3.3, 4.3.10 and 4.3.11. To date, the MOP has adopted two Resolutions that relate to this subject: • Resolution 4.5 (2008) on Introduced non-native waterbird species in the Agreement Area - xxxxx://xxx.xxxx- xxxx.xxx/xx/xxxxxxxx/xxxxxxxxxx-xxx-xxxxxx-xxxxxxxxx-xxxxxxx-xxxxxxxxx-xxxx-0 ; • Resolution 5.15 (2012) on Impact of invasive alien aquatic weeds on waterbird habitats in Africa - xxxxx://xxx.xxxx-xxxx.xxx/en/document/impact-invasive-alien-aquatic-weeds-waterbird-habitats-africa-1 . AEWA’s MOP-adopted Conservation Guidelines No.10 (2006) on avoidance of introductions of non-native waterbird species (xxxxx://xxx.xxxx-xxxx.xxx/en/publication/aewa-conservation-guidelines-no-10- guidelines-avoidance-introductions-non-native ) have identified some multilateral processes/platforms that may offer entry-points for influence. These are summarised in the table below. Multilateral process / platform Where identified by AEWA Possible opportunity for influence ⮚ Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)
Existing AEWA orientations. The AEWA MOP-adopted Conservation Guidelines No. 6 (2005) on regulating trade in migratory waterbirds (xxxxx://xxx.xxxx-xxxx.xxx/en/publication/aewa-conservation-guidelines-no-6-guidelines-regulating-trade-migratory-waterbirds-ts-no ) identified some multilateral processes/platforms that may offer entry-points for influence. These and some others are summarised in the table below. Multilateral process / platform Where identified by AEWA Possible opportunity for influence
Existing AEWA orientations. Annex 3 to the Agreement (the Action Plan) includes two items (4.3.7 and 4.3.8) that urge Parties to take appropriate actions nationally or through the framework of Regional Fisheries Management Organisations (RFMOs) and relevant international organisations to minimise the impact of fisheries on migratory waterbirds, including from bycatch. Bycatch may occur in both freshwater and marine environments, and both are considered in AEWA orientations. To date, two MOP Resolutions have focused specifically on seabirds: Resolution 6.9 (2015) on Improving the conservation status of African-Eurasian seabirds - xxxxx://xxx.xxxx-xxxx.xxx/en/document/improving-conservation-status-african-eurasian-seabirds-3 ; Resolution 7.6 (2018) on Priorities for the conservation of seabirds in the African-Eurasian flyways - xxxxx://xxx.xxxx-xxxx.xxx/en/document/priorities-conservation-seabirds-african-eurasian-flyways-1 . Multilateral processes/platforms identified in these that may offer an entry-point for influencing threats from fisheries bycatch are summarised in the table below. Resolution 6.9 notes that AEWA’s priority should be those species, regions, or threats not already the subject of relevant frameworks, e.g. tropical seabirds or those impacted by small or artisanal fisheries not regulated by RFMOs. The Resolution requested the AEWA Technical Committee to advise on the most urgent priorities. Multilateral process / platform Where identified by AEWA Possible opportunity for influence Convention on Migratory Species (CMS) CMS COP Resolution 10.14 (2011) on Bycatch of CMS-listed species in gillnet fisheries Noted in preamble of MOP Resolution 6.9 (2015) on Improving the conservation status of African-Eurasian seabirds CMS Parties accounting for action via national reports. Follow-up attention at future CMS COPs. CMS COP Resolution 12.22 (2017) on Bycatch of CMS-listed species Noted in preamble of MOP Resolution 7.6 (2018) on Priorities for the conservation of seabirds in the African-Eurasian flyways CMS Parties accounting for action via national reports. Follow-up attention at future CMS COPs. International Single Species Action Plan for the Conservation of the White-headed Duck Oxyura leucocephala – activities 2.3, 2.6, 2.7 and 5.8 address the threat of bycatch in fishing nets AEWA is joint publisher of the Action Plan (AEWA Technical Series No. 8, 2006) together with CMS and the EU, with the aim of assisting fulfilment of obligations under AEWA, CMS and the EU Wild Bir...
Existing AEWA orientations. Under Article III.2 (g) of the Agreement, Parties are required to prohibit the deliberate introduction of non-native waterbird species, to take measures to prevent the unintentional release of such species, and to take measures to prevent them becoming a threat if they have already been introduced. These obligations are elaborated further in Annex 3 (the Action Plan), in paragraphs 2.5.1, 2.5.2, 2.5.3, 3.3, 4.3.10 and 4.3.11. To date, the MOP has adopted two Resolutions that relate to this subject: Resolution 4.5 (2008) on Introduced non-native waterbird species in the Agreement Area - xxxxx://xxx.xxxx-xxxx.xxx/en/document/introduced-non-native-waterbird-species-agreement-area-0 ;
