The 9th Meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties

06/09/2005


"Wetlands and water: supporting life, sustaining livelihoods"
9th Meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties
to the Convention on Wetlands (Ramsar, Iran, 1971)
Kampala, Uganda, 8-15 November 2005
 

Ramsar COP9 DOC. 13
[English and Spanish only]

Regional overview of the implementation of the Convention and its Strategic Plan 2003 - 2008: North America

National Reports upon which this overview is based can be consulted on the Ramsar Web site, http://ramsar.org/cop9/cop9_natlrpts_index.htm.

Contracting Parties in North America: Canada, the United States of America, and Mexico (3).

Contracting Parties whose National Reports are included in this analysis: Canada, the United States of America, and Mexico (3).

1. Main achievements since COP8 and priorities for 2006-2008

1.1 Main achievements since COP8

1. As of July 30 2005 the region has 117 Ramsar sites, compared to 61 by 30 August 2002, an 82% increase in the number of sites during the period. The total area of designated sites is now almost 19.5 million hectares, representing approximately 15.5% by area of Wetlands of International Importance in the world, compared to 15.4% by COP8. Since COP8, one site has been designated by Canada, 51 by Mexico and 4 by the United States of America.

2. Canada and the United States have National Wetland Policies in place, while Mexico has established policies that partially fulfill this task.

3. Canada and the United States have bodies that perform the tasks of a National Ramsar Committee, while Mexico has begun the process of establishing its Committee. The United States Committee is promoting tourism activities in wetlands as well as public awareness activities.

4. The United States has provided USD 905,000 to support the Wetlands for the Future Initiative (WFF) since 2002. So far WFF has provided USD 2,725,000 in funding. During the last triennium USD 531,516 were used to support 56 projects in the Neotropical Region, as well as USD 63,438 in funding for 5 projects in Mexico.

5. The Governments of Canada and the United States have made important financial contributions to the Ramsar Hemispheric Centre in Panama, equivalent to USD 31,301 (The United States - USD 23,971, and Canada - USD 7,330), as well as to the Ninth Meeting of the Conference of the Contracting Parties to the Convention on Wetlands, to which the United States contributed with USD 258,730 and Canada donated CAD 74,000.

6. The Governments of Canada, the United States of America, and Mexico provided funding and jointly coordinated with Argentina, Bahamas, and Nicaragua the organization of the 3rd Pan-American Regional Meeting held in Merida, Mexico, in November 2004. The United States, Canada and Mexico contributed with USD 44,409, USD 34,000 and USD 35,211, respectively.

7. The North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) has continued providing important support to the conservation of wetland ecosystems as well to the population of waterfowl from Canada, the United States and Mexico.

8. Ducks Unlimited Canada (DUC) has partnered with over 50 organizations including government, industry, and aboriginal communities and has successfully mapped over 51 million hectares (20 percent) of the western boreal forest. This work will make an important contribution to the Canadian Wetland Inventory (CWI), for which DUC serves as a technical partner.

9. The Agricultural Policy Framework (APF) was developed and implemented in 2003 to significantly transform agricultural production in Canada, emphasizing the importance of sustainable use of the soil and the environment.

10. Canada adopted in June 2003 the Species at Risk Act (SARA) in order to protect these species and their habitats.

11. A strategy on exotic invasive species for Canada was approved in September 2004 to minimize risks to economy, environment and society.

12. The Canadian website WetKit continues advancing in promoting practical tools to help Canadians better understand and manage their wetlands.

13. The Wildlife Habitat Canada Organization is working with Wetlands International-Indonesia, with the financial support of the Canadian International Development Agency, CIDA (US$3.4 millon/5 years), the government of Indonesia, and the Global Environmental Centre, to promote conservation practices for peatlands in Indonesia.

14. The Canada Iraq Marshlands Initiative (CIMI) is an alliance between Canadian and Iraqi universities, government and NGOs. With 3 million in funds from CIDA, its implementation began in 2004 and will continue to 2007 to increase scientific and biological knowledge of marshlands in South Iraq in order to facilitate restoration efforts and to strengthen national capacities for the efficient management of wetlands.

15. The Association of State Wetland Managers, with the support of the United States Federal Government, organized an international conference in October 2004 with emphasis on the guidelines for wise use, designation and management of Ramsar sites.

16. The Western Hemisphere Initiative for Migrating Species (WHIMS) and the White Waters to Blue Waters Initiative were promoted by the Government of the United States during the last triennium, and Ramsar has participated as an active member in these initiatives.

17. During the triennium, the International Corporate Wetlands Restoration Partnership (ICWRP) was also established to support NGOs and corporations interested in donating funds to wetland projects for Ramsar or World Heritage sites. The first project implemented is for the Sian Ka'an reserve in Mexico, with USD 750,000.

18. Mexico has made efforts to begin its national Wetlands Inventory in the near future.

19. Mexico has opened the first CEPA (Communication, Education, and Public Awareness) initiative centre in the country.

1.2 Priorities for 2006-2008

20. These priorities for future implementation action have been identified from those Strategic Plan Operational Objectives which all three countries in the region have reported as high priorities in their national reports (priorities 1 to 4), or at least two countries identified as high priority (priorities 5 to 17).

1. Policy instruments related to wise use of wetlands [2.1]
2. Local communities, indigenous people and cultural values [6.1]
3. Maintaining ecological characteristics of all Ramsar sites [11.1]
4. Cooperative monitoring and management for shared species that depend on wetlands [12.2]
5. Wetlands inventory [1.1]
6. Methodologies to achieve conservation and rational use of wetlands [3.1]
7. Increasing acknowledgment of the values and functions of wetlands [3.3]
8. Integration of wetland policies into broader planning and management from local to national scales [3.4]
9. Invasive alien species [5.1]
10. Promoting campaigns, programs and projects to increase awareness of the community about the services offered by wetlands [9.VI]
11. Maintaining ecological characteristics of all Ramsar sites [11.1]
12. Integrated Management Inventory of shared wetlands and river basins [12.1]
13. Shared use of specialized knowledge and information [14.1]
14. Looking after environmental safeguards and assessments to keep them part of all development projects affecting the wetlands, including national and foreign investments [15.2]
15. Funding for the Convention
16. Institutional and financial capacity of the Contracting Parties [18.1]
17. Education and training [20.1]

21. In addition to these areas of future priority action, three further, more specific actions remain a priority for 2006-2008:

18. Removal of Ramsar Everglades National Park site from the Montreux Record
19. Continued support for Wetlands for the Future Fund-style initiatives, and
20. Support for the development of the Ramsar Hemispheric Centre in Panama.

2. Implementation activities undertaken since COP8

22. This analysis is presented for each of the 21 Operational Objectives of the Ramsar Strategic Plan 2003-2008. Numbers in square brackets [...] in each section heading refer to the numbering of the relevant Operational Objective in the Strategic Plan.

2.1 Inventory and assessment

2.1.A Wetland inventory [1.1]

23. All three Contracting Parties in North America have partially completed comprehensive wetland inventories with national coverage. The Canadian Wetland Inventory (CWI) represents a new approach to classification and mapping of wetlands in Canada, and it is expected to produce important information on wetlands from now to 2009. The first phase was finished in 2003 with optimized satellite images for wetland mapping, increasing knowledge about classification of soil with remote sensors, and digital maps of wetlands in the pilot demonstration regions. Mexico currently has a coastal ecosystem inventory, and is planning to finalize a national inventory in the near future. Mexico has integrated a cross-institutional group that will take care of defining the methodology to complete the national inventory. Likewise, it has accomplished prioritization exercises for wetland conservation. The update of the Wetland Status and Trends prepared by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service will be ready by 31 December 2005. It has been estimated that there are now 42.5 million hectares of wetlands in the United States, or 5% of the inland area of the country, mainly located in the southern states of the United States. Approximately 45% of the Alaskan territory is made up of wetlands.

24. The results related to custody, storage and maintenance of national databases on wetlands are similar, since the three countries report having partial data compiled and hosted in databases from various institutions and bodies. In the case of Canada data from the Natural Resources Topographic Information Centre will be used as a base for the wetlands inventory, and these data will be stored as they are produced. At the moment some of these data regarding the provinces are already stored at that level. In the case of the United States the information belongs to the public domain.

2.1.B Wetland assessment [1.2]

25. Canada, Mexico and the United States reported having actively contributed to the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (MA), through experts, information and comments.

26. The United States is the only country in the region that carries out a periodic analysis of the ecological characteristics of all the wetlands in its territory, and it will soon publish the results of the most recent analysis. In the United States coastland wetlands are part of the biannual report on coastal conditions carried out by EPA (United States Environmental Protection Agency), which is also working as part of a wetland monitoring group at the national level that will develop assessment and monitoring tools and strengthen training programs on this issue. Mexico has made this analysis in isolated cases.

27. For two years, the Wildlife Society carried out a detailed assessment of wetland vulnerability in regard to the consequences of climate change in North America (Global Climate Change and Wildlife in North America, 2004). Likewise, a report by the Joint International Commission has been produced on the possible implications of climate change and the change of quality of water in the Great Lakes.

28. Canada has completed a partial evaluation of the contribution of some wetlands, such as the Great Lakes, Lake Ontario and Saint Lawrence, to the maintenance of fisheries. In Mexico, the Fisheries State Department is working to some extent on this issue. In the case of the United States, approximately 75% of commercial fishing depends on wetlands, and more than one third of the endangered fauna lives in wetlands. The "No net loss" policy on wetlands has a direct relationship with the contribution of these ecosystems to fisheries. The three countries have carried out training activities on responsible fishing.

29. Of the three countries, Mexico reports that it began to prepare a standard for ecological flow. The United States says that a quality and quantity assessment of water available for wetlands that they require is carried out when necessary, for local or state authorities to make a decision on water distribution.

2.2 Policies and legislation, including impact assessment and valuation

2.2.A Policy instruments for wetland wise use [2.1]

30. Canada and the United States have National Wetland Policies (NWP) in place, while in Mexico the task is partially fulfilled through the National Water Law (LAN) 2004.

31. Canada and the United States report that they are fully considering the Ramsar Convention obligations in their environmental policies, while Mexico reports partial efforts in this respect.

2.2.B Development, review and amendment of policies, legislation, institutions and practices [2.2]

32. All Contracting Parties in the region have carried out complete (United States) or partial (Canada and Mexico) reviews of laws and institutions related to wetlands.

33. Canada has conducted a review of its national institutions related to wetlands in order to ensure the resource availability for implementation of the Ramsar Convention. Several Canadian provinces (Ontario, Saskatchewan, Nova Scotia and British Columbia) are currently revising their legislation and institutions to avoid the unwise use of wetlands. Mexico has only completed a general assessment of the institutions that look after the use of natural resources and the environment. The United States has not made any assessment due to the number and diversity of all institutions participating in wetland protection and conservation. The Environmental Quality Council in the United States is currently analyzing the federal programs that establish wetlands where not present, preserve the existing wetlands to improve their functions and values, and protect them to make sure they are maintained in appropriate conditions.

34. The heritage and cultural values of wetlands have been incorporated into the existing legal frameworks and policies in Canada. In the United States, this is done on an individual case basis, for example the Caddo Lake Ramsar site.

35. All three countries in North America have full or partial legal requirements to carry out an EIA in all likely cases of change in ecological character of all wetlands, including Ramsar sites. Mexico has full requirement, while the other two Contracting Parties in the region have partial requirements for this task. In Canada, the requirement is dependent upon general environmental requirements at provincial and federal level; however, a strategic environmental assessment is required for all policies, plans or programs that may have important positive or negative environmental impacts. This document must be submitted to a minister or a Cabinet member for approval. In the United States the requirement applies to major federal projects that significantly affect the quality of human environment.

36. There has been progress in preparing and/or applying valuation methodologies for the economic, social and environmental benefits and functions of wetlands in Canada and the United States. In Canada, in 2004, Ducks Unlimited carried out a study on the wetland valuation issue, and the Simon Fraser University in Vancouver prepared case studies in British Columbia, Saskatchewan/Manitoba, Ontario and Nova Scotia.

2.3 Integration of wetland wise use into sustainable development

2.3.A Methodologies for wetland conservation and wise use [3.1]

37. Through its observer to the Scientific and Technical Review Panel (STRP), Canada has contributed to the revision of the Wise Use concept, its application, and compatibility with the sustainable development objectives that will be presented in COP9.

38. Canada has undertaken a review of resource materials related to wetland management, policies and practices, through the initiative "WetKit: Tools for Working with Wetlands in Canada". Likewise, Environment Canada has provided training in wetland management and conservation at different levels. Mexico is disseminating the wise use principles and will promote training on this matter. The United States has various resource materials actively distributed by the EPA, and the Wildlife Service provides training on wetlands at its national training centre in West Virginia.

39. Ramsar guidelines on wise use are partially disseminated at the Ramsar sites in Mexico, and in Canada they are available through WetKit.

40. The United States has contributed to information exchange regarding conservation, integrated management and sustainable use of mangrove ecosystems. At the beginning of 2003, Mexico issued the Official Mexican Standard NOM-022-SEMARNAT-2003, which established the specifications for preservation, conservation, wise use and restoration of coastal wetlands in mangrove areas, as well as the standard for mangrove conservation in the Gulf of México, and has promoted information exchange with local communities.

2.3.B Peatlands [3.2]

41. Canada has participated in the process guided by the Ramsar Secretariat for establishing a Coordinating Committee for global action on peatlands.

42. Canada and the United States reported giving special attention to under-represented wetland types, including peatlands. Furthermore, Canada also highlighted the presence of peatlands in its Ramsar sites and mentioned that Wildlife Habitat Canada has been the leader in developing a peatland website (www.peat-portal.net). Likewise, Canada reported CIDA is supporting a project on peatlands in Indonesia through Wetlands International (WI) -Indonesia Program. In addition they mentioned there are peatland inventories that currently exist in several Canadian provinces. Mexico reported lack of knowledge about the peatland situation and indicated this should be a point of analysis for the national wetlands inventory. None of the three countries applies the COP8 Guidelines for Global Action on Peatlands.

2.3.C Increase of recognition of wetland values and functions [3.3]

43. Canada emphasized its promotion for full awareness of the cultural and social heritage of wetlands through the "Canadian Heritage Rivers System" (CHRS). During the last triennium six rivers were designated as Canadian Heritage Rivers. In addition, social and cultural acknowledgment of wetlands is promoted in their Interpreting Centre at the Ramsar site in Cap Tourmente, Québec. In the United States measures are taken at the local level to make emphasis on the social and cultural importance of wetlands. The United States National Parks Service has undertaken the role of increasing awareness regarding social and cultural importance of wetlands. Likewise, in Mexico, these values are taken into consideration for preparing wetland management plans.

2.3.D Integration of wetland policies into broader planning and management from local to national scales [3.4]

44. All Contracting Parties in North America have implemented or developed (wholly or in part) programs with varying percentages of national coverage using integrated management approaches for river basins or coastal zones. However, none of the countries has participated in the Ramsar/CBD River Basins Initiative. In the case of Mexico integration is achieved through the Basin Councils, which are under the responsibility of the National Water Commission (CNA).

45. None of the countries in the region has used the Ramsar Guidelines for the allocation and management of water for maintaining ecological functions of wetlands, though part of their content has been applied to local assessments for the resource allocation. Nor they have used the Ramsar Wise Use Handbook 4 on integrated river basin management. In the United States, a group of 40 scientists is evaluating the Nature Conservancy recommendations for environmental flow evaluation, and when this process is complete a cross reference with Resolutions VIII.1 and VIII.2 will be carried out. Canada, on the other hand, is applying the ecosystem approach.

46. Mexico reports that it has not taken measures to avoid damage to the ecological character of wetlands as a result of responses to the Kyoto Protocol such as revegetation and management, afforestation and reforestation, while the United States says it has partially accomplished this through the studies of its Geological Service and the Department of Agriculture, which have concluded that wetlands can act as carbon sinks through restoration programs. Canada reports advances since the study on carbon sinks was prepared by Wetlands International (Americas), the North American Council for Wetlands Conservation, and Ducks Unlimited (Canada) in 1999.

2.4 Restoration and rehabilitation [4.1]

47. The three Contracting Parties in the region have only carried out partial assessments to identify priority wetlands for restoration or rehabilitation. In Canada efforts have focused on expanding protected areas and funding recovery programs for endangered species, especially under the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP) and other programs. In the United States the Fish and Wildlife Service has focused on priority projects that include restoration of wetlands in Florida and wetland conservation to achieve a positive balance through compensation.

48. Additionally, all countries in the region report being engaged in restoration and rehabilitation actions. Canada detailed several existing programs, including the Wetland Habitat Fund, the Pacific Estuary Conservation Program, and the Species at Risk Recovery. Mexico reported restoration efforts at three Ramsar sites, damaged by meteorological events, as well as in some river basins. In the United States not all efforts are gathered under one centralized implementation process; rather, different programs are successfully managed regionally. A chief national effort has been the Coastal Wetland Planning, Protection, and Restoration Act, which seeks to restore nearly 40% of all the continental wetlands in the country.

49. All countries in the region reported that they have taken important steps to preserve, restore and protect wetlands. The United States highlights that in 2004 there were donations equivalent to 13 million dollars to 10 States with this purpose, with an equivalent counterpart from private owners and the States. This program, starting in 1990, has granted almost 12 million dollars in donations and has restored 189,000 acres. In the case of Canada, it is considered that joint habitat alliances within the North American Waterfowl Management Plan have been of great importance for wetland protection, as in the case of the Pacific Coast Joint Venture (PCJV), the Canadian Eastern Habitat Joint Venture and the Canadian Intermountain Joint Venture. The threats related to aquaculture, mining, hydrocarbon spills, and expansion of the agricultural border have been addressed through these initiatives. Likewise, Ducks Unlimited has adopted measures to protect important wetlands, water and habitats related to fowl, as part of its North Western Program.

50. All the Parties in the region have information on wetlands restoration. However, it is still necessary to make more resource materials available to the Ramsar Secretariat.

2.5 Invasive alien species [5.1]

51. All three Contracting Parties in North America provided details on their resource materials and initiatives regarding invasive species, and have recognized the importance of the issue. Besides national initiatives there are bi- and tri-national cooperation mechanisms to face cross-border exotic species under the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (NAAEC) and other agreements.

2.6 Local communities, indigenous people, and cultural values [6.1]

52. All Contracting Parties in North America have broadly promoted local stakeholder management of wetlands, while all three governments also provide support for site managers in monitoring ecological character of Ramsar sites.

53. The COP8 guiding principles regarding cultural values have been applied unevenly in the three countries in the region, with more importance in Canada, and varying applications in Mexico and the United States. In spite of that, all countries in North America reported that they have supported the use of traditional knowledge and management practices, as well as the participation of communities in this management.

2.7 Private sector involvement [7.1]

54. Canada and the United States report having carried out efforts to encourage wise use among the private sector. In Canada various specialized institutions and companies have organized wetland conservation associations, such as the Canadian Habitat Joint Venture NAWMP, and the Canadian Intermountain Joint Venture. Mexico has promoted private sector participation in the Advisory Councils for Protected Areas and the Basin Councils. In the United States initiatives focused on the private sector have been introduced, as in the case of the Corporate Wetlands Restoration Partnership, forums, and other institutions, where federal, state and local organizations, private owners (industrial and non-industrial), ecological groups and non-profit organizations participate.

55. The United States has established "Friends of wetlands" local forums for the private sector in various wetlands in California, Washington State, Ohio, New York, and Kansas. Canada has similar groups at Cap Tourmente, Lake San Francois and Alaksen Ramsar sites.

56. Concerning analysis of the implications of national and international trade of products from wetlands, only Canada reported it has a series of ongoing programs as part of its obligations under CITES.

2.8 Incentives [8.1]

57. Canada reported some concrete activities related to the use of incentives. In North America, the United States has made the most complete assessment of the existing incentive measures, particularly in relation to subsidization for agriculture, according to its Wetland Reserves Program; Canada has promoted conservation of wetlands through legal incentives that modify land use and promote ecological donations; in Mexico there are ongoing negotiations on payments for environmental services, and a study was carried out to apply various economic and fiscal incentives in order to promote the wise use of natural resources.

58. Concerning the use of groundwater, the United States provided information on advances in this area on behalf of several agencies. It particularly highlighted the efforts of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) promoting a strategy of "best practices". Mexico reported availability of water in180 aquifers and created the Underground Water Technical Committees at the regional level, where decisions are discussed and taken together with the authorities. In Canada, groundwater is part of the province/territorial and/or municipal jurisdiction, and several provinces are working on issues related to hydrological, social, economic and environmental aspects of underground waters.

2.9 Communication, education, and public awareness (CEPA) [9.1]

59. Overall, CEPA-related activities are generally further developed in the North American region than in many other parts of the world, although there are still opportunities for further increasing CEPA work on wetlands, for example by establishing CEPA task force groups and analyzing national CEPA needs.

60. The accomplishment of pilot projects to evaluate different CEPA approaches has had its major advances in the United States, through the actions at the Caddo Lake Ramsar Wetland Science and Visitors Centre, which carries out communication activities in various regions of the U.S. and the north of Mexico.

61. Canada and the United States have carried out isolated actions to identify regional CEPA needs. Additionally, Mexico has recently begun gathering information and making a diagnosis of CEPA actions for wetlands.

62. All three countries in the region have designated their government CEPA National Focal Points, but only Mexico and the United States have designated a non-governmental CEPA National Focal Point.

63. Regarding establishing task groups as well as preparing national CEPA plans, only Mexico reported to have meetings scheduled for this purpose.

64. On the other hand, concerning communication and information exchange among government agencies, Canada and the United States already have concrete measures in place, while Mexico is going through an awareness-raising phase. All Contracting Parties in North America have provided support to international programs that encourage transfer of information, knowledge and skills among wetland education centers and educators.

65. Likewise, all three countries have undertaken activities to contribute to the preparation of international CEPA resource materials. In the United States materials are produced in a decentralized way, while in Canada there are specific entities assigned for this purpose, such as Ducks Unlimited Canada (DUC). In the case of Mexico there is no detailed information in this respect.

66. Regarding the use of other tools to enhance the work of CEPA, including email, the Wetland Link International program from the United Kingdom, twinning of centers, and assessing capacities, the United States has the widest range of initiatives and programs, followed by Canada and Mexico. The United States has incorporated material related to wetlands in the curricula of some official study programs. DUC has a wide selection of wetland materials available in their website, for students, parents, teachers, landowners and farmers, researchers and others.

67. Regarding incorporation of CEPA information on watershed management, the United States has reported the greatest advances through the initiatives developed by the Caddo Lake Institute, while advances in Canada have been partial.

68. The three countries actively celebrate World Wetlands Day and distribute related materials at the national level.

69. Canada, the United States and Mexico have encouraged the establishment of educational centers in wetland sites, and have plans for increasing them in number in the future.

2.10 Designation of Ramsar sites

2.10.A Application of the Strategic Framework [10.1]

70. While Canada and Mexico have preliminary directories of potential Ramsar sites, in the United States the designation process is promoted by local organizations and not by a centralized agency. Since COP8 a total of 55 new Ramsar sites have been designated in the region, covering a surface of almost 4 million hectares; 1 in Canada, 4 in the United states and 51 in Mexico (see annex, Table 1).

71. However, so far no country in the region has developed a strategy or priorities for the designation of new Ramsar sites, even though there are some initiatives in this regard from Canada and Mexico.

72. Since none of the countries has a complete inventory of their wetlands, or a national strategy to designate priority sites, it is difficult to state which types of wetlands are under-represented in North America.

73. There is a large number of coastal-marine Ramsar sites in the North American Region (71 of 117 sites). Canada has designated a total of 18, while there are 43 in Mexico, and 10 in the United States.

74. A total of 85 Ramsar sites in the region have been designated for threatened species (Criterion 2): Canada currently has 19 such sites; Mexico has 50 sites, the greatest number in the region; and the United States has 16.

75. A high proportion of Ramsar sites in the region also have formal protection by a national, provincial or local body (95 out of 117). Canada has designated a total of 34, while there are 40 in Mexico, and 21 in the United States that were previously protected. Within the region, Mexico has the largest number of sites for which Ramsar designation provided the first form of protected areas designation (18 sites, of which 17 were designated during the last triennium).

76. Contracting Parties in North America have not designated all suitable shared wetlands as Ramsar Sites. However, they have included some shared wetlands in the Ramsar List. Canada has 7 cross-border sites, Mexico has 3 and the United States has 1. Of these, 2 from México and 1 from the United States were designated during the last triennium.

2.10.B Maintenance and use of the Ramsar Sites Database [10.2]

77. After analyzing the available information regarding date of last update of Ramsar Information Sheets (RIS), 12 sites in the United States and one site in Mexico require updated RISs. Canada recently updated the RIS of all its Ramsar sites but these were not provided in the required format approved by COP8, and the Secretariat is waiting to receive the necessary maps in the near future. Details of the RIS updates needed are provided in Table 2 of the Annex.

2.11 Management planning and monitoring of Ramsar sites

2.11.A Maintenance of the ecological character of all Ramsar sites [11.1]

78. Canada has reported measures in place to maintain the ecological character of all its Ramsar sites, and the United Stated has reported partial measures.

79. Even though none of the Contracting Parties in North America has directly applied the COP9 New Guidelines for management planning of Ramsar sites and other wetlands, all the Parties have, to a lesser or greater extent, established management plans or strategies for their Ramsar sites (24 sites in Canada, all in place; 18 sites in the United States, 15 in place; and 13 sites in Mexico, all in place). By 31 July 2005, 54 (46%) of the 117 Ramsar sites in North America had management plans. Table 3 of the Annex gives details of the situation of management planning for all the Ramsar sites of the region.

80. Mexico reported zoning measures being in place for five Ramsar sites.

81. Canada and the United States reported the use of strict protection measures to regulate the activities in vulnerable wetlands.

82. All three countries in North America have management committees for the wetland sites, or similar organizations, in many of their Ramsar sites.

2.11.B Monitoring the condition of Ramsar sites, including application of Article 3.2 and the Montreux Record [11.2]

83. The North America region still has one Ramsar site on the Montreux record: Everglades National Park, USA, designated on 4 June 1987, and placed on the Montreux Record on 16 June 1993. No Ramsar Advisory Mission has been carried out in this site.

84. The United States provided details of the situation in the Everglades in its National Report. The application of the General Management Plan for the park is a process that began in 2002 and will last approximately 4-5 years. Some initiatives were carried out as part of this plan to involve the neighboring communities in 2003 and 2004, and these have resulted in a better zoning and management of the park. Other activities have also been accomplished to eliminate exotic invasive species, as well as a massive effort to rehabilitate the area. However, there is no clear diagnosis on whether the ecological character of the site is being improved or maintained overall, or a timetable for removal from the Montreux Record provided.

2.12 Management of shared water resources, wetlands and wetland species

2.12.A Inventory and integrated management of shared wetlands and hydrological basins [12.1]

85. All countries in North America reported their advances in transboundary wetlands identification. In the United States this task is accomplished through the National Wetland Inventory that includes Ramsar sites bordering Mexico, such as the Tijuana River National Estuarine Research Reserve (TRNERR) and the Caddo Lake. In Canada, this effort has also been carried out through the National Wetland Inventory, which is still being completed. In Mexico some transboundary sites that can be the objects of international cooperation have been identified, but no information was provided in terms of the methodology used to identify them. Canada and the United States have made the greatest achievements in the region in terms of applying joint impact studies in the area of the Great Lakes.

(See also additional related references to integrated zone management in sections 2.3.D and 2.10.A)

2.12.B Cooperative monitoring and management of shared wetland-dependent species [12.2]

86. All countries in the region regularly collect bird population data, though none of them report transmitting that information to Wetlands International to update the 1% thresholds for those populations. [Secretariat note: Canada and the United States have jointly provided updated population estimates for North American shorebirds to Wetlands International in 2005.] In Mexico the existence of migratory species is one of the criteria considered as part of the proposal for new Ramsar sites, and the three countries in the region have designated 25 sites that meet this criterion (6 sites in Canada, 7 sites in Mexico, and 12 in the United States). Regarding sites that contribute to the protection of migratory species, it has been estimated that there are 68 sites of importance for migratory birds dependent on wetlands at the regional level (29 sites in Canada, 28 sites in Mexico, and 11 in the United States), and another 27 sites that are important for several species of sea turtles (1 in the United states and 26 in Mexico).

2.12.C Support and promotion of regional arrangements under the Convention [12.3]

87. Canada and the United States reported their contribution to the creation and operation of the Ramsar Regional Centre for Training and Research on Wetlands in the Western Hemisphere, in Panama.

2.13 Collaboration with other multilateral environmental agreements and institutions [13.1]

88. There are national mechanisms in the three countries in the region for coordination between the Ramsar Administrative Authority with other Multilateral Environment Agreements (MEA). This task is carried out by cross-ministry groups in the United States, by assigning similar focal point topic responsibilities in Mexico (Ramsar, MAB, World Heritage), and through the International Relations Directorate in Canada. None of the Contracting Parties has yet carried out official assessments of the Joint Work Plan between the Ramsar Convention and the CBD.

89. The United States actively supports and participates in the Wider Caribbean Region Action Plan (Cartagena Convention). Mexico participates actively in the regional initiative with the Mesoamerican Barrier Reef System and the Mesoamerican Biological Corridor.

2.14 Sharing expertise and information [14.1]

90. All Contracting Parties in North America have undertaken activities or given assistance with regards to North-South or South-South cooperation, particularly cooperating within the Neotropical Region. Some significant examples include: The Canada-Iraq Marshlands Initiative (CIMI) to promote transfer of information and train personnel responsible of the wetlands in Iraq; the annual Workshop on Wetlands Management in Mexico, and the cooperation of this country with parties in the Neotropics in the context of the Meso-American biological corridor and the Meso-American barrier reef system; and the highly valuable support provided by the United States for South-South cooperation through funding of the Wetlands for the Future Initiative and recently sponsoring a person to assist the Secretariat in Oceania. The United States highlighted the importance of the Caddo Lake Institute with regards to education, communication and information exchange with community members, government officials and other stakeholders.

91. One country in North America reported the twinning of their Ramsar sites with those of other Contracting Parties: Mexico formalized the twinning of its Ria Lagartos site with Cienega de Zapata, Cuba, as well as La Encrucijada with Laguna del Tigre in Guatemala. The United States also mentioned the efforts accomplished to designate sites together with Mexico, particularly in the bordering states of Texas and Tamaulipas. Canada has identified the possibility of future twinning of sites in the context of the Western Hemisphere Shorebird Reserve Network (WHSRN).

2.15 Financing the conservation and wise use of wetlands

2.15.A Promoting international assistance to support the conservation and wise use of wetlands [15.1]

92. Canada and the United States have development assistance bodies and both have provided funding to conserve and manage wetlands in other countries. Two examples from Canada are: capacity building in Iraq (marshes) and Indonesia (peatlands). In the United States, besides the contributions made to the wetlands in Iraq, technical assistance has been provided for designation and management of four wetlands in Tamaulipas, Mexico.

93. Mexico, the only Contracting Party in the region eligible to receive international development assistance, reported the mobilization of external funds for undertaking projects such as the management plan for the Delta del Rio Colorado and the SINAP 1 & 2 projects (FMAM/GEF), as well as a project for wetland conservation and management in Rio Celestun (JICA).

94. Canada and the United States are represented in the governing bodies or scientific advisory bodies of multilateral donor institutions and the GEF.

2.15.B Environmental safeguards and assessments as part of all development projects (including foreign and domestic investments) affecting wetlands [15.2]

95. Requirements of EIA in each Contracting Party are covered in section 2.2.B.

2.16 Financing for the Convention [16.1]

96. Two of the Contracting Parties in North America reported being up to date with their contributions to the Convention. This was confirmed from a Secretariat review of the state of contributions as of 20 July 2005.

97. Both Canada and the United States provided invaluable financial support to the organization of the regional meetings for the Convention and to the Ninth Conference of the Parties (COP9). The United States has also provided additional assistance to the Ramsar Scientific and Technical Review Panel (STRP)

98. During the three-year period, the United States has also contributed a total of USD 905,000 to the Wetlands for the Future Initiative.

2.17 Institutional mechanisms of the Convention [17.1]

99. All Contracting Parties of North America have appointed their STRP National Focal Points. In the case of Mexico, there is an interim National Focal Point.

2.18 Institutional and financial capacity of Contracting Parties [18.1]

100. Only a partial examination of the national institutions related to wetlands has been conducted in the three countries of the region. In Canada it has been mainly conducted by Ducks Unlimited, while in the United States the Council on Environmental Quality has assumed this responsibility.

101. None of the Contracting Parties in the region has established a steering committee for the focal points of the various Agreements related to the environment. In Mexico this function has been partially fulfilled by the International Affairs Coordination Unit of SEMARNAT.

102. All Contracting Parties in the region report having a National Ramsar Committee or similar cross-sectoral body, as well as cooperation mechanisms between the Ramsar Administrative Authority and other institutions. There are ongoing efforts in the United States to expand and strengthen the existing National Ramsar Committee, currently composed of more than 10 organizations. The cooperation mechanisms in this country include initiatives between the Fishing & Wild Life Services (USFWS) and the State Department, as well as with the Caddo Lake Institute. In Canada two forums have been established before COP8 to provide information related to wetlands: the Federal Wetlands Forum (2001) integrated by 17 federal agencies and 4 national NGOs and the North American Bird Conservation Council (formerly North American Wetlands Conservation Council), which is an instrumental part of the North American Waterfowl Management Plan (NAWMP). Establishing new inter-institutional cooperation mechanisms, such as a National Ramsar Committee, is going through a planning process.

103. Canada is the only country that has conducted an analysis of the National Administrative Authority's performance and the implementation of the Convention on a national basis through an audit carried out by the Commissioner for the Environment and Sustainable Development. The preliminary report recommends improving the information on the conservation status of Ramsar sites.

104. All Contracting Parties in North America allocate funds for conservation and wise use of wetlands. In each country these allocations have taken place as part of wider allocations for the environment or as part of cross-sector and cross-ministerial initiatives and programs.

2.19 Education and Training [20.1]

105. None of the Contracting Parties has carried out an analysis of the national and local training needs regarding the Convention. Notwithstanding this, the three countries have reported various training opportunities that involve action areas of the Convention. Particularly, the United States has the National Training & Conservation Centre and information sources on Ramsar eco-tourism guidelines. Nevertheless, the country's competent bodies are evaluating the convenience of training at all levels. Canada has partially analyzed its training capacities and has courses on wetland restoration at its Wetlands Institute in British Columbia, amongst others. Mexico is assessing CEPA activities through the Centre of Education and Training for Sustainable Development (CECADESU), and it is also undertaking an analysis of its training and development needs.

106. All three Contracting Parties of North America have envisaged extensive training activities and modules related to wetlands. Mexico and the United States have also provided training to wetland managers through personnel exchanges.

107. All the Contracting Parties in the region have contributed to the development of the Ramsar Regional Centre for Training and Research on Wetlands in the Western Hemisphere (CREHO).

2.20 Membership of the Convention [21.1]

108.The United States has actively encouraged the adhesion of non-Parties in the Caribbean Region through financial and technical assistance. Canada has provided materials and assistance to Iraq for its accession to the Convention and the possible designation of a Ramsar site in November 2005.


Annex

Summary statistics

Table 1 - North America Ramsar Sites designated since COP8

Country

Site name

Designation date

Area
(in ha.)

Wetland types

1

Canada

Columbia Wetlands

05.06.05

15,069.8

Ts, U, Xp

2

United States of America

Grassland Ecological Area

02.02.05

65,000

Ts

3

Tijuana River National Estuarine Research Reserve (TRNERR)

02.02.05

1,021

G, Ts

4

Kawainui and Hamakua Marsh Complex

02.02.04

414

Ts, U

5

Mexico

Parque Nacional Arrecifes de Xcalak

27.11.03

17,949

A, B, C, I

6

Cuencas y corales de la zona costera de Huatulco

27.11.03

44,400

A, C, I

7

Laguna de Tecocomulco

27.11.03

1,769

None

8

Parque Nacional Isla Contoy

27.11.03

5,126

A, B, C, I

9

Parque Nacional Isla Isabel

27.11.03

94

A, C

10

Parque Nacional Lagunas de Montebello

27.11.03

6,022

Zk(b)

11

Playa Tortuguera Rancho Nuevo

27.11.03

30

None

12

Playa Tortuguera Tierra Colorada

27.11.03

54

I

13

Reserva Estatal El Palmar

27.11.03

50,177

A, B, G, I, Zk(a), Zk(b)

14

Sian Ka’an

27.11.03

652,193

A, B, C, I, Zk(a)

15

Áreas de Protección de Flora y Fauna de Nahá y Metzabok

02.02.04

7,216

Zk(b)

16

Bala’an K’aax

02.02.04

131,610

Zk(b)

17

Reserva de la Biosfera Ría Celestún

02.02.04

81,482

A, B, I, Zk(a), Zk(b)

18

Reserva de la Biosfera Chamela-Cuixmala

02.02.04

13,142

I

19

Ciénegas de Lerma

02.02.04

3,023

None

20

La Mancha y El Llano

02.02.04

1,414.27

B, I, U

21

Laguna de Metztitlán

02.02.04

2,937

None

22

Laguna de Sayula

02.02.04

16,800

Ts

23

Laguna Ojo de Liebre

02.02.04

36,600

B, G, I

24

Laguna Playa Colorada-Santa María La Reforma

02.02.04

53,140

A, G, I

25

Laguna San Ignacio

02.02.04

17,500

B, G

26

Manglares y humedales de la Laguna de Sontecomapan

02.02.04

8,921

I, Ts

27

Parque Nacional Arrecife de Puerto Morelos

02.02.04

9,066

A, B, C, I, Ts, Zk(a), Zk(b)

28

Parque Nacional Cañón del Sumidero

02.02.04

21,789

Zk(b)

29

Islas Marietas

02.02.04

1,357.29

A, B, C

30

Parque Nacional Sistema Arrecifal Veracruzano

02.02.04

52,238

A, B, C, I

31

Playa Tortuguera Cahuitán

02.02.04

65

None

32

Playa Tortuguera Chenkán

02.02.04

100

I

33

Playa Tortuguera El Verde Camacho

02.02.04

6,450

I

34

Playón Mexiquillo

02.02.04

66.5

None

35

Playa Tortuguera X’cacel-X’cacelito

02.02.04

362

A, B, C, I, Zk(a)

36

Presa Jalpan

02.02.04

68

None

37

Reserva de la Biosfera Banco Chinchorro

02.02.04

144,360

A, B, C, I

38

Reserva de la Biosfera Los Petenes

02.02.04

282,857

A, B, G, I, Zk(a)

39

Sistema Lagunar Alvarado

02.02.04

267,010

I

40

Área de Protección de Flora y Fauna Laguna de Términos

02.02.04

705,016

I, U

41

Reserva de la Biosfera Archipiélago de Revillagigedo

02.02.04

636,685

C

42

Parque Nacional Bahía de Loreto

02.02.04

206,580.75

A, B, I

43

Isla San Pedro Mártir

02.02.04

30,165

None

44

Área de Protección de Flora y Fauna Yum Balam

02.02.04

154,052

A, B, I, Ts, Zk(a), Zk(b)

45

Laguna de Yuriria

02.02.04

15,020

None

46

Laguna Madre

02.02.04

307,894.156

A, B, G, I, Ts

47

Sistema Lacustre Ejidos de Xochimilco y San Gregorio Atlapulco

02.02.04

2,657

Ts

48

Laguna de Chichankanab

02.02.04

1,999

Ts, Zk(b)

49

Humedales del Lago de Pátzcuaro

02.02.05

707

None

50

Laguna Costera El Caimán

02.02.05

1,125

I

51

Parque Nacional Arrecifes de Cozumel

02.02.05

11,987

A, B, C, Zk(a)

52

Sistema de Lagunas Interdunarias de la Ciudad de Veracruz

02.02.05

141

None

53

Humedales de la Laguna La Popotera

05.06.05

1,975

None

54

Laguna de Zacapu

05.06.05

40

Xp, U

55

Laguna de Zapotlán

05.06.05

1,496

None

 

Key for under-represented wetland types:

Coastal and marine wetlands
A Permanent shallow marine waters, in most cases less than six meters deep at low tide; includes sea bays and straits.
B Marine sub-tidal aquatic beds; includes kelp beds, sea-grass beds, tropical marine meadows
C Coral reefs.
G Intertidal mud, sand or salt flats.
I Intertidal forested wetlands; includes mangrove swamps, nipah swamps and tidal freshwater swamp forests.
Zk(a) Karst and other subterranean hydrological systems, marine and coastal.

Inland Wetlands
Ts Seasonal/intermittent freshwater marshes/pools on inorganic soils; includes sloughs, potholes, seasonally flooded meadows, sedge marshes.
U Non-forested peatlands; includes shrub or open bogs, swamps, fens
Xp Forested peatlands; peatswamp forests.
Zk(b) Karst and other subterranean hydrological systems, inland.

Human-made wetlands
Zk(c) Karst and other subterranean hydrological systems, human-made.

Table 2 - Ramsar Information Sheets (RIS) and Maps needing updating

Country

Site Name

Area (ha)

Last RIS update

Comments

United States of America

Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge

9.509

1992

RIS and map pending.

 

Bolinas Lagoon

445

1997

RIS and map pending.

 

Cache-Lower White Rivers

81.376

1993

RIS and map pending.

 

Cache River-Cypress Creek Wetlands

24.281

1994

RIS and map pending.

 

Connecticut River Estuary & Tidal Wetlands Complex

6.484

1995

RIS and map pending.

 

Delaware Bay Estuary

51.252

1992

RIS and map pending.

 

Edwin B Forsythe National Wildlife Refuge

13.080

1992

RIS and map pending.

 

Horicon Marsh

12.912

1990

RIS and map pending.

 

Izembek Lagoon National Wildlife Refuge

168.433

1992

RIS and map pending.

 

Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge

159.889

1992

RIS and map pending.

 

Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge

1.908

1993

RIS and map pending.

 

Sand Lake National Wildlife Refuge

8,700

1998

RIS and map pending.

Mexico

Área de Protección de Flora y Fauna Cuatrociénegas

84,347

 

1995

RIS and map pending.

Table 3 - North America Ramsar site list and management plan status

Country

Site Name

Area (ha)

Management Plan (MP)

Additional comments

Canada

Alaksen

586

Yes

1986 MP was revised in 1993 and 1995; to be finalized (2002).

 

Baie de l’Isle-Verte

2.215

Yes

MP fully implemented.

 

Beaverhill Lake

18.050

Yes

MP fully implemented.

 

Cap Tourmente

2.398

Yes

MP fully implemented.

 

Chignecto

1.020

Yes

MP fully implemented.

 

Columbia Wetlands

15,070

 

Yes

PM developed and instrumented since April 2001

 

Creston Valley

6.970

Yes

MP fully implemented.

 

Delta Marsh

23.000

Yes

MP fully implemented.

 

Dewey Soper Migratory Bird Sanctuary

815.900

No

MP currently under development, to be finalized 2004 under the Nunavut land claim agreement.

 

Grand Codroy Estuary

925

Yes

MP fully implemented.

 

Hay-Zama Lakes

50.000

No

No information available.

 

Lac Saint-François

2.310

Yes

No information available.

 

Lac Saint-Pierre

11.952

No

MP currently under development 2001.

 

Last Mountain Lake

15.602

Yes

MP fully implemented.

 

Long Point

13.730

Yes

MP fully implemented.

 

Malpeque Bay

24.440

No

MP currently under development 2001.

 

Mary’s Point

1.200

Yes

Partial MP- part of site is in National Wildlife Area

 

Matchedash Bay Provincial Wildlife Area

1.840

Yes

MP fully implemented.

 

McConnell River

32.800

No

MP under development, to be finalized 2004 under Nunavut Land Claim Agreement.

 

Mer Bleue Conservation Area

3.100

No

MP currently under development 2001.

 

Minesing Swamp

6.000

Yes

MP fully implemented.

 

Musquodoboit Harbour

1.925

No

MP currently under development 2001.

 

Oak Hammock Marsh

3.600

Yes

MP fully implemented.

 

Old Crow Flats

617.000

No

MP fully implemented, also covers Vuntut National Park.

 

Peace-Athabasca Delta

321.300

Yes

Preliminary MP 1993. Under revision 2001.

 

Point Pelee

1.564

Yes

MP fully implemented.

 

Polar Bear Pass

262.400

Yes

MP fully implemented, but will be affected by future Innuit Impact Benefit Agreement.

 

Polar Bear Provincial Park

2.408.700

Yes

MP fully implemented; new MP in preparation.

 

Queen Maud Gulf

6.278.200

No

MP under development, to be finalized 2004 under Nunavut Land Claim Agreement.

 

Quill Lakes

63.500

Yes

MP fully implemented.

 

Rasmussen Lowlands

300.000

No

MP under development, to be finalized 2004 under Nunavut Land Claim Agreement.

 

Shepody Bay

12.200

Yes

MP fully implemented.

 

Southern Bight-Minas Basin

26.800

No

MP under development.

 

Southern James Bay (Moose River & Hannah Bay)

25.290

No

MP development is not programmed (2001).

 

St. Clair

244

Yes

MP fully implemented.

 

Tabusintac Lagoon & River Estuary

4.997

No

MP under development 2001.

 

Whooping Crane Summer Range

1.689.500

Yes

Partial MP for part of the site within Wood Buffalo National Park

 

Total area per country (ha)

13,066,571

24

 

United States of America

Ash Meadows National Wildlife Refuge

9.509

No

MP being prepared for National Wildlife Refuge 2002.

 

Bolinas Lagoon

445

Yes

State Recreation Area

 

Cache-Lower White Rivers

81.376

No

MP being prepared for National Wildlife Refuge 2002.

 

Cache River-Cypress Creek Wetlands

24.281

Yes

MP currently under revision for National Wildlife Refuge.

 

Caddo Lake

8.382

No

Training facility for community based management currently under development.

 

Catahoula Lake

12.150

Yes

MP being prepared for National Wildlife Refuge 2002.

 

Chesapeake Bay Estuarine Complex

45.000

No

MP to be developed by 2012 for National Wildlife Refuge.

 

Cheyenne Bottoms State Game Area

10.978

Yes

MP fully implemented 2002.

 

Connecticut River Estuary & Tidal Wetlands Complex

6.484

Yes

MP fully implemented 2002.

 

Delaware Bay Estuary

51.252

No

MP to be developed by 2012 for National Wildlife Refuge.

 

Edwin B Forsythe National Wildlife Refuge

13.080

No

MP being prepared for National Wildlife Refuge 2002.

 

Everglades National Park

566.143

Yes

MP fully implemented.

 

Grassland Ecological Area (GEA)

65,000

 

No

There are designations for protection but not for management

 

Horicon Marsh

12.912

No

MP being prepared for National Wildlife Refuge 2002.

 

Izembek Lagoon National Wildlife Refuge

168.433

No

MP being prepared for National Wildlife Refuge 2002.

 

Okefenokee National Wildlife Refuge

159.889

No

MP being prepared for National Wildlife Refuge 2002.

 

Pelican Island National Wildlife Refuge

1.908

No

MP being prepared for National Wildlife Refuge 2002.

 

Sand Lake National Wildlife Refuge

8.700

No

MP being prepared for National Wildlife Refuge.

 

Quivira National Wildlife Refuge

8.958

Yes

MP approved in 2000 for the Rattlesnake Creek Basin.

 

Tijuana River National Estuarine Research Reserve (TRNERR)

1,021

 

Yes

National Wildlife Refuge

 

Tomales Bay

2,850

 

No

MP planned for 2000.

 

Kawainui and Hamakua Marsh Complex

414

 

Yes

MP currently exists; has not been instrumented

Total area per country

 

1,303,519

9

 

Mexico

Área de Protección de Flora y Fauna Cuatrociénegas

84,347

Yes

MP applied (NR,2002). Area changed from 150,000ha in 2001 RIS update.

 

Área de Protección de Flora y Fauna Laguna de Términos

705,016

Yes

MP adopted since 1997

 

Área de Protección de Flora y Fauna de Nahá y Metzabok

7,216

No

MP under revision (Nov 2003)

 

Área de Protección de Flora y Fauna Yum Balam

154,052

No

MP to be published (Dec 2003)

 

Bala’an K’aax

131,610

No

Management program planned

 

Ciénegas de Lerma

3,023

No

MP under development (2003)

 

Cuencas y corales de la zona costera de Huatulco

44,400

Yes

MP exists for Parque Nacional Huatulco (part of the site); and territorial ordering study for Santa Ma. Huatulco (another part).

 

Dzilam (reserva estatal)

61,707

Yes

MP implemented (NR,2002)

 

Humedal de Importancia Especialmente para la Conservación de Aves Acuáticas Reserva Ría Lagartos

60,348

Yes

MP implemented (NR,2002). Site expanded from 47,840ha in 2001 RIS update.

 

Humedales de la Laguna La Popotera

1,975

Yes

MP under development (RIS 2005)

 

Humedales del Delta del Rio Colorado

250,000

Yes

MP implemented (NR,2002)

 

Humedales del Lago de Pátzcuaro

707

Yes

Basin MP prepared by the Fisheries Commission, under review.

 

Isla San Pedro Mártir

30,165

Yes

Joint MP for the Islands in the Gulf of California, there are plans to draft specific plans

 

Islas Marietas

1,357

No

MP to be developed when decreed as protected area

 

La Mancha-El Llano

1,414

No

Community Management Plan under development by the Institute of Ecology. External notification and pictures showing it is completely dry.

 

Laguna Costera El Caimán

1,125

No

Presence of OET [Organization for Tropical Studies]. The national plan for mangrove protection is being followed. Under the process of being decreed as MPA

 

Laguna de Chichankanab

1,999

No

No information available.

 

Laguna de Metztitlán

2,937

Yes

MP for Reserva de la Biosfera Barranca de Metztitlán

 

Laguna de Sayula

16,800

No

Basin MP under development (2003)

 

Laguna Madre

307,894

No

Management diagnosis 1993

 

Laguna de Tecocomulco

1,769

No

Proposed as protected area; MP to be developed.

 

Laguna de Yuriria

15,020

Yes

MP (2001) under implementation

 

Laguna Ojo de Liebre

36,600

Yes

MP for Reserva de la Biosfera El Vizcaino (2000)

 

Laguna Playa Colorada-Santa María La Reforma

53,140

Yes

MP for the islands of the gulf of California, pending for the zone of Dautillos-Malacataya (2003)

 

Laguna San Ignacio

17,500

Yes

MP for Reserva de la Biosfera El Vizcaino (2000)

 

Laguna de Zacapu

40

No

MP under planning

 

Laguna de Zapotlán

1,496

No

MP under development (RIS 2005)

 

Manglares y humedales de la Laguna de Sontecomapan

8,921

Yes

MP for Reserva de la Biosfera Los Tuxtlas under development (2003)

 

Marismas Nacionales

200,000

Yes

Uses Coastal Zone Ecological Ordering Program. Special management instrument being prepared (NR,2002)

 

Parque Nacional Arrecife de Puerto Morelos

9,066

Yes

MP implemented

 

Parque Nacional Arrecifes de Cozumel

11,987

Yes

National Sea Park, Refuge Zone.

 

Parque Nacional Arrecifes de Xcalak

17,949

No

MP developed by. Sep 2003 and to be soon published in the Official Journal.

 

Parque Nacional Bahía de Loreto

206,581

Yes

MP approved and being executed

 

Parque Nacional Cañón del Sumidero

21,789

No

MP under revision (2003)

 

Parque Nacional Isla Contoy

5,126

Yes

1994MP, being currently updated.

 

Parque Nacional Isla Isabel

94

No

MP final version under evaluation.

 

Parque Nacional Lagunas de Montebello

6,022

Yes

MP developed by Pronatura 2002, to be validated in the communities.

 

Parque Nacional Sistema Arrecifal Veracruzano

52,238

No

 MP under development (2003)

 

Playa Tortuguera Cahuitán

65

Yes

Laud turtle conservation program

 

Playa Tortuguera Chenkán

100

No

Guidelines of the national protection, conservation and management program for marine turtles are followed, but there is no specific MP

 

Playa Tortuguera El Verde Camacho

6,450

No

MP waiting for official approval (2003)

 

Playón Mexiquillo

67

No

Guidelines of the national protection, conservation and management program for marine turtles are followed, but there is no specific MP.

 

Playa Tortuguera Rancho Nuevo

30

No

It is part of the reserves for turtle protection; there is no specific MP.

 

Playa Tortuguera Tierra Colorada

54

Yes

MP for turtle protection, implemented by the Laúd Project.

 

Playa Tortuguera X’Cacel - X’Cacelito

362

Yes

MP 2000 under execution

 

Presa Jalpan

68

Yes

RB Sierra Gorda MP, which encompasses the site

 

Reserva de la Biosfera Archipiélago de Revillagigedo

636,685

Yes

Conservation and management program

 

Reserva de la Biosfera Banco Chinchorro

144,360

Yes

MP 2000, partially accomplished

 

Reserva de la Biosfera Chamela-Cuixmala

13,142

Yes

Reserve’s MP

 

Reserva de la Biosfera La Encrucijada

144,868

Yes

Applied MP (NR,2002). RIS last update 1997.

 

Reserva de la Biosfera Los Petenes

282,857

Yes

MP 1997, requires updating

 

Reserva de la Biósfera Pantanos de Centla

302,706

Yes

MP implemented (NR,2002)

 

Reserva de la Biosfera Ría Celestún

81,482

No

Ecological ordering in validation phase (2004)

 

Reserva Estatal El Palmar

50,177

Yes

MP executed but under revision and updating.

 

Sian Ka’an

652,193

Yes

MP 1996 currently being updated; public use program (1995) being updated; ecological ordering program (Coastal Development Plan) 2000.

 

Sistema de Lagunas Interdunarias de la Ciudad de Veracruz

141

No

There is a proposal for Lagoon management under process. Lagoon Restoration Program, Lobby meeting record.

 

Sistema lacustre Ejidos de Xochimilco y San gregorio Atlapulco

2,657

No

MP under development, it is expected for 2004

 

Sistema Lagunar Alvarado

267,010

No

Various management studies

 

 

5,118,904

34

 

TOTAL

117

 

19,488,994

 

64

 

For reasons of economy, this document is printed in a limited number, and will not be distributed at the meeting. Delegates are requested to bring their copies to the meeting and not to request additional copies.

Back to top
Follow us 
Ramsar Awards 

The Convention today

Number of » Contracting Parties: 168 Sites designated for the
» List of Wetlands of
International Importance
2,186 Total surface area of designated sites (hectares): 208,674,247

Ramsar Secretariat

Rue Mauverney 28
CH-1196 Gland, Switzerland
Tel.: +41 22 999 0170
Fax: +41 22 999 0169
E-Mail: ramsar@ramsar.org
Map: click here

Ramsar Forum: subscribe