36. Many delegations expressed concern that the precautionary approach, as applied in Annex 4 of CITES Resolution 9.24, could be subject to extreme interpretations using worst case scenarios, and suggested that it should be recommended to CITES that this Annex could be redrafted to reflect a balanced and practicable use of the principle with due regard to the impact on international trade or to coastal communities. Several delegations recommended use of terminology as applied by IUCN and the Biosafety Protocol. In view of these considerations, the FAO Secretariat was requested by some delegations to expand their treatment of Annex 4 in FI:SLC/2000/2. It was also suggested that the use of "quotas" by CITES might benefit from inputs regarding the use of various types of quotas in modern adaptive fisheries management.
37. Several delegations highlighted the particular difficulties linked to high seas fisheries and straddling stocks, and its implication for the use of the precautionary approach as applied in Annex 4 of CITES Resolution 9.24. Reference was made, in this respect, to the FAO Code of Conduct for Responsible Fisheries and the UN Fish Stocks Agreement. The Secretariat was requested by some delegations to expand its comments in document FI:SLC/2000/2 to provide more background on such issues, with special reference to Annex 4b.
38. Some delegations, while recognizing that Appendix II listings do not prohibit trade as such, highlighted the inherent documentary burden and the resulting effects on trade for importers and exporters in developing countries. Other delegations pointed out that decisions on technical matters by CITES required a two-thirds majority and thus felt that the concern expressed by some delegates was somewhat alarmist. The importance of having clear and accurate criteria was underlined by many delegations in order to avoid having to rely on interpretation, especially concerning delisting and list transfer.
