TNAG-0470-FCO40-535-Legislation-for-protection-of-wild-life-in-Hong-Kong-1974 — Page 14

RESTRICTED

out they stopp

to

STD, 2

福

Also Mrs Winchatter

BRITISH EMBASSY

208

Wotton Sna

Des 23/12

7/3

A C Stuart Esq

BOE.

PEKING

We await reply from

Hong Kong and Indian Ocean Department

FCO

13 December 1974

RECEIVED

REGISTRY No. 52

- 6 JAN1975

199

Dear Stuart,

NKK7/1

WASHINGTON CONVENTION ON TRADE IN ENDANGERED SPECIES

1991.

Please refer to FCO telno 79 Saving to Hong Kong of 25 November 1974.

2.

I agree that the Chinese would be unlikely to be willing to provide the export licences required under the Washington Convention. Nor indeed would it be appropriate for us to approach them in terms of the Convention in view of the Taiwanese signature. I think the most we could hope for (and have already received) would be an oral assurance that a particular species was not endangered in China.

3. I also agree with your supposition that the Chinese view of what is or is not an endangered species would not always coincide with the Convention's interpretation. It is easy enough to see why, if one glances at the Appendices to the Convention. To take the Section Aves in Appendix II, for example, I am sure a Chinese ornithologist could argue that

C

Ciconia nigra

Pelecanus crispus Aquila chrysaetos

are not uncommon, and certainly not endangered, while Cygnus bewickii jankowskii is no more than a race of a widespread and locally common swan (Cygnus bewickii/columbianus).

4. I do not think the Chinese would be upset by Hong Kong legislation affecting the import of Appendix I and II species. The vast bulk of their animal exports is in species outside the Appendices of the Convention (and in some cases genuinely if only locally, endangered by being exported in such numbers). Their attitude towards Hong Kong attempts to comply with the terms of the Convention would be unlikely to be obstructive.

yours taxonomieity,

Jou Gerson

cc Alan Donald Esq

Political Adviser Hong Kong

RESTRICTED

J H C Gerson