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

Thu Jan 13 11:47:46 CST 2005

I would also like to tell the group that Phytopharm is negotiating or  
has already signed agreements to work with a very reputable trade  
group.  This trade group will be providing sustainable supply of Hoodia  
from Namibia and is very sensitive to IPR issues of prospecting.  There  
may have been some issues in the past with this plant, but they seem to  
be worked out to the benefit of all, I hope.

Trish
On Thursday, January 13, 2005, at 09:31  AM, Patricia_DeAngelis at fws.gov  
wrote:

>
>
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> MPWG mailing list
> MPWG at lists.plantconservation.org
> http://lists.plantconservation.org/mailman/listinfo/ 
> mpwg_lists.plantconservation.org
>
> To unsubscribe, send an e-mail to  
> MPWG-request at lists.plantconservation.org with the word "unsubscribe"  
> in the subject line.
>
> Disclaimer
> Any advice given on this list regarding diagnosis or treatments etc.  
> reflects ONLY the opinion of the individual who posts the message. The  
> information contained in posts is not intended nor implied to be a  
> substitute for professional medical advice relative to your specific  
> medical condition or question. All medical and other healthcare  
> information that is discussed on this list should be carefully  
> reviewed by the individual reader and their qualified healthcare  
> professional. Posts do not reflect any official opinions or positions  
> of the Plant Conservation Alliance.
>
>
Trish Flaster, Executive Director
Botanical Liaisons, LLC
1180 Crestmoor Drive
Boulder, CO 80303
303-494-1555, 303-494-2555 FAX
www.BotanicalLiaisons.com