Role of scientific authority in CITES implementation in Uganda

1. Role of Scientific Authority in
CITES Implementation in
Uganda – Case of Wild Flora
Issa Katwesige
Forest Sector Support Department
Ministry of Water and Environment
CITES Framework Training for the National Wildlife Crime Coordination Taskforce,
Kabalega Resort, Masindi July 8-12, 2019

2. Background
 Uganda acceded to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered
Species (CITES) on July 18, 1991 and the Convention entered into force on
October 10, 1991.
 Has 1 Management Authority and 3 Scientific Authorities ;
 Ministry of Tourism, Wildlife and Antiquities is the Management Authority
and National Focal Point; Ministry of Water and Environment is Scientific
Authority for Flora; Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA) is the Scientific
Authority for Fauna while the Fisheries Department in MAAIF is the Scientific
Authority for Fish.

3. CITES for Plants
 There are currently 3 major plant species listed for which Uganda is a Range
State;
 Cycads – Encephalartos species for ornamental purposes all under
Appendix I (the highest protection level)
 Prunus africana – African cherry – medicinal for the bark and leaves under
Appendix II
 East African Sandalwood – Osyris lanceolata for essential oils, wood
curvings, under Appendix II

4. Status for each species
 Cycads – Encephalartos spp
 All ugandan cycads belong to Appendix I
 Encephalartos equatorialis endemic to Mayuge District
 Encephalartos macrostrobilus endemic to Adjumani
 Encephalartos septentrionalis endemic to Moyo District
 Encephalartos whitelockii endemic Mpanga in Kamwenge/Kabarole
District
 Only one clearance made through MOU with Al Wabra Wildlife
Preservation from Doha, Quatar in a one-off transfer of 5 live plants of each
of the species in 2012.

5. Osyris lanceolata – E. African
Sandalwood
 Listed under Appendix II in 2013 (COP16).
 Formal processed formalized in 2012 after Skybeam Ltd signed MOU with
Moroto District Local Government witnessed by Ministry of Water and
Environment. UNCST as Competent National Authority for Access to Genetic
Resources and Benefit Sharing (ABS) gave access permit on pilot scale before
CITES came into force.
 Processing plant established in Tororo District, Eastern Uganda; additional
materials imported to supplement locally sourced materials;
 MOU expired in July 2017 and currently under review/audit to ascertain
sustainability of local extraction;
 Wood Impex is registered for importation mainly from Sudan and DRC including
Santalacae spp.
 Delayed inventory for Non Detrimental Findings (NDF) to determine viability for
trade and Cross-border smuggling of materials still a big challenge;

6. Prunus africana – African Cherry/Red
stinkwood
 Is the most advanced with a clear implementation framework so far.
 3 stock inventories conducted since 2007 and latest being in 2015.
 Inventories are the basis for Non Detrimental Findings
 Current annual export quota maintained at 252,567 kgs of dry bark since
2016;
 Species domesticated with farmers supported to plant the tree on their
farmland/plantations and materials only sourced from private land;
 The species is being promoted as another competitive commercial crop
and contributing to community livelihood improvement;
 There is a clear public private partnership between a private export
company with government;

7. Imports and re-exports
 There is small scale importation recorded for listed raw
timber for processing and re-export e.g. Dalbergia
latifolia (Indian Rosewood) for guitar making after all
Dalbergia spp were listed at COP 17;
 Santalaceae species or any other look alike species
especially for sandalwood are treated as Appendix II as
provided for under Appendix II (b) to prevent disguises;
 Clearly documented materials in transit from
neighboring countries are allowed to proceed;

8. Tracking and Traceability
 Inventory
 Buyer/Seller consent teams
 Harvesting inspection by the District Forestry Services
 Pre-export field inspection (for harvesting technique, quantity validation,
farmer verification)
 Export recommendation to Management Authority (MTWA)
 Pre- export border inspection (Verification for conformity between field
findings against actual inspection) for final stamping.

9. Identification
 Look alikes
 Prunus africana look alike, Olinia rochetiana – Morphology, Use
 Osyris lanceolata; Santalum spp – Morphology, Use
 Traded parts
 Prunus africana – Bark, timber, charcoal, handles, fruits/food
 Osyris lanceolata – Oils, carvings, spent dust, local roots/leaves for
medicine.

10. Identification
 Taxonomic identification; Reference keys, expert identification
(conventional and traditional), field guides, online tools (www.plantlist.com,
Best practice guide book for forensic timber identification by UN Office on
Drugs and Crime, CITES and Timber Guide to Listed Tree Species
(Madelaine Groves, et al., herbaria collections (anatomy, digitisation) CITES
Wood ID, molecular identification, Organoleptic methods through taste
and smell.

11. Challenges
 Habitat loss
 Limited enforcement capacity of MA and SA (e.g. Inadequate staffing at
border points and the DFS, operational budgets, tools)
 Limited information sharing and collaboration among institutions;
 Limited identification capacity among counterpart staff along the value
chain (customs, prosecution, phytosanitary, border control, etc.)
 Sophisticated offenders (timing, equipment, connivance, forgeries, etc.)
 Weak (“reverse”) sentences, if at all.

12. Challenges cont’d
 Deliberate fraud/illicit trade (e.g. disguised wood products, collusion of
border officials, etc);
 Challenges in reporting trade due to pooled customs coding of products
 Complicated domestication for some species e.g. sandalwood
 Outdated/out of stock reference materials;
 High turnover of trained staff;

13. Opportunities
 Regional policies and laws (e.g. EAC Forestry Policy under development)
 Tendency towards more stringent laws
 National Wildlife Crime Coordination Taskforce
 Willingness of Development Partners on capacity building
 Domestication

14. Recommendations
 Continuous training of customs and technical staff in identification;
 Basic research to establish clear biological taxonomy of listed species;
 Engage the World Customs Organisation to consider distinct trade codes
for CITES listed tree products;
 Consider use of advanced identification techniques such as DNA analysis in
identification of wood material at customs points;
 Dissemination of identification manuals of CITES listed products at all border
points for ease of basic identification;
 Put in place joint databases to address challenges on data sharing and
material exchange.

15. Conclusion
 Overall, CITES implementation in Uganda especially for plants is still a work
in progress and requires collaboration of all concerned stakeholders locally
and in the region;
 Upcoming cross-border project on Sustainable trade and conservation of
Sandalwood between Uganda, Kenya and United Republic of Tanzania is
timely and a step in the right direction;
 Domestication of Prunus africana from the wild has proved successful and
increased awareness among communities and should be replicated for
other species;
 CITES listing of species without a doubt increases their protection; Uganda is
initiating processes to list Afzelia africana and Vitelleria paradoxa for the
same reasons and calls for support from partner states when the time
comes.

16. 
