[MPWG] CITES imposes trade controls on hoodia cactus, asian yew

[Patricia_DeAngelis at fws.gov]

Jennifer, Thanks for this posting.

As an employee of the Division of Scientific Authority, I would like to
expound upon the issues raised in this posting.  Our office is responsible
for evaluating CITES proposals on behalf of the U.S..  This is a much
larger issue than any news article or e-mail summary alone could provide,
but I would like to comment briefly on both of the species mentioned below,
Hoodia  and Taxus.

Contrary to the article, it is a mischaracterization of CITES to state that
the listing...

..."will give added protection to plants which could save untold human
lives while earning billions of dollars for big drug companies."
...will "...protect hoodia from illegal cultivation."

The implication that material not derived from the CSIR patent and
Phytopharm commercial developers would be deemed "illegal" is incorrect.
To the contrary, CITES will not be policing the patent.  It is CITES' job
to help ensure that commercial trade does not threaten the survival of
species in the wild - patenting a chemical constituent does not mean that
you've ensured the survival of the species in the wild.

Below, I have pasted some information on these two species, compiled by Pat
Ford and myself, to give you an idea of some of the other issues that come
into play here.  It's not everything - but, it's a starting point on the
issues.   If you want more information, I posted a summary of the
Thirteenth Conference of the Parties (COP13) decisions to the listserve on
10/20/2004.

Patricia S. De Angelis, Ph.D.
Botanist - Division of Scientific Authority
Chair - Plant Conservation Alliance - Medicinal Plant Working Group
US Fish & Wildlife Service
4401 N. Fairfax Dr., Suite 750
Arlington, VA  22203
703-358-1708 x1753
FAX: 703-358-2276
Working for the conservation and sustainable use of our green natural
resources.
<www.nps.gov/plants/medicinal>


Hoodia Listing

Facts on the species
   Hoodia is not a cactus but a thorny succulent in the milkweed family
   (Asclepiadaceae).  This genus grows in the desert regions of at least
   five African countries (Angola, Botswana, Namibia, South Africa, and
   Zimbabwe).
   Hoodia populations are naturally patchy in distribution, maintaining low
   numbers.  For instance, the most common species is H. gordonii, being
   found in three of the five range countries.  Yet, H. gordonii
   populations are small and scattered, sometimes consisting of only a few
   dozen plants or less.
   Not all species grow in all range countries.  For instance, H. gordonii
   does not grow in Botswana, which, as of the proposal, was the largest
   source of legal trade in Hoodia raw material.
   For centuries, San bushmen have chewed Hoodia stems to suppress the
   appetite.  With increased commercial demand (stemming from the patent
   and the global market for "natural" appetite suppressants), there was
   growing evidence of unsustainable harvest practices.
   The chemical constituent that provides the appetite suppressing activity
   is known as P57.  Although the species most commonly associated with
   Hoodia as a weight loss product is H. gordonii, the active compound is
   found in at least five species (all of which are included in the P57
   patent - see below).
   CSIR patented P57 in 1997 and contracted with Phytopharm shortly
   thereafter to develop a commercial product.  In 2003, the San were
   included in a benefit-sharing agreement after a lengthy legal dispute.
   In addition to some percentage of royalties from sales of the product,
   there is a provision that San bushmen will be trained in either
   sustainable harvest or cultivation methods for the species.
   There are reportedly attempts to cultivate this species on a commercial
   scale, although there is no information as to the success or expected
   harvest of any cultivated material and whether the San are actually
   involved in this process.
   Pfizer, originally contracted to assist in product development,
   purchased .5 ton of Hoodia  chips in 2002 reportedly for US$2.8 million.
   Pfizer has since backed out of the commercial development of this
   product.  The speculated (but unconfirmed) reason?  Because P57 could
   not be synthesized.

Facts on the listing
Botswana, Namibia, South Africa put the proposal forward to list the entire
genus.  The Appendix II listing goes into effect on January 12, 2005. Upon
that date, all materials being transported internationally will require a
CITES permit, either Appendix II or pre-convention.

Something that is unique about this listing is the proposed exemption that
came with it:  Any material derived from a sustainable production program
that is being developed by the three proponent countries will be deemed
"exempt" from CITES.  The respective CITES authorities will play some role
in determining whether the material is being produced without detriment to
wild populations.  But, what the criteria for that will be remains unknown.

The most important question that raw materials buyers might ask is: Where
did this come from?
A good answer(s) to that question would include information regarding the
actual species in the shipment: Which species is it, what is the country of
origin,
who is involved in the supply chain, and was it wild-harvested or
cultivated? If wild-harvested, at what rate relative to the total
population size?  If cultivated, who, what, where, when and how?

These are some of the questions that CITES will be asking when the listing
goes into effect!

More info...
-Here's the document that records all the decisions that were made at
COP13: http://www.cites.org/eng/notifs/2004/073.pdf
-Here are some reference materials developed by NGOs in response to the
proposal:
IUCN-SSC/TRAFFIC:
http://www.iucn.org/themes/ssc/citescop13/cop13analyses.htm
Species Survival Network:
http://www.speciessurvivalnetwork.org/proposals.htm

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - -
Taxus Listing
Species included in CITES Appendix II:
T. wallichiana, T. chinensis, T. cuspidata, T. fuana, and T.sumatrana.
Prior to COP13, Oct. 2004, the listing only included the Himalayan species,
T. wallichiana and chemical derivatives were not regulated.  At COP13, the
U.S. and China co-sponsored the proposal to include the 4 Asian species and
to amend the listing to include chemical derivatives.  The rationale for
including the Asian species was based on the level of harvest that was
occurring in China.  Although the Chinese Government regulates the harvest
of all yews in the country, the high market value for the bark spurred
unsustainable harvest of these slow growing, long-lived trees.
Additionally, we amended the listing to include chemical derivatives (e.g.,
paclitaxel and paclitaxel-equivalent compounds).

For more information, see these links:
I would reference the CITES COP13 Web page:
http://www.cites.org/eng/cop/index.shtml  or
http://www.cites.org/eng/cop/13/prop/index.shtml