Review of selected species subject to longstanding

UNEP-WCMC technical report Review of selected species subject to longstanding import suspensions Part II: Asia and Oceania (Version edited for public release) Review of selected species subject to long-standing import suspensions. Part II: Asia and Oceania

Prepared for The European Commission, Directorate General Environment, Directorate E - Global & Regional Challenges, LIFE ENV.E.2. Global Sustainability, Trade & Multilateral Agreements, Brussels, Belgium Prepared February 2016 Copyright European Commission 2016 Citation UNEP-WCMC. 2016. Review of selected species subject to long-standing import suspensions. Part II: Asia and Oceania. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge. The UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) is the specialist biodiversity assessment of the United Nations Environment Programme, the world s foremost intergovernmental environmental organization. The Centre has been in operation for over 30 years, combining scientific research with policy advice and the development of decision tools. We are able to provide objective, scientifically rigorous products and services to help decisionmakers recognize the value of biodiversity and apply this knowledge to all that they do. To do this, we collate and verify data on biodiversity and ecosystem services that we analyze and interpret in comprehensive assessments, making the results available in appropriate forms for national and international level decision-makers and businesses. To ensure that our work is both sustainable and equitable we seek to build the capacity of partners where needed, so that they can provide the same services at national and regional scales. The contents of this report do not necessarily reflect the views or policies of UNEP, contributory organisations or editors. The designations employed and the presentations do not imply the expressions of any opinion whatsoever on the part of UNEP, the European Commission or contributory organisations, editors or publishers concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city area or its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. The mention of a commercial entity or product in this publication does not imply endorsement by UNEP. UNEP World Conservation Monitoring Centre (UNEP-WCMC) 219 Huntingdon Road, Cambridge CB3 0DL, UK Tel: +44 1223 277314 www.unep-wcmc.org UNEP promotes environmentally sound practices globally and in its own activities. Printing on paper from environmentally sustainable forests and recycled fibre is encouraged.

Contents Introduction and summary...1 Psittrichas fulgidus II/B... 3 Varanus beccarii II/B... 7 Morelia boeleni II/B... 10 Batagur borneoensis II/B... 13 Cuora amboinensis II/B... 17 Indotestudo forstenii II/B... 21 Hippopus hippopus II/B... 24 Tridacna crocea II/B... 28 Tridacna derasa II/B... 33 Tridacna maxima II/B... 42 Tridacna squamosa II/B... 48 Cypripedium japonicum II/B... 55 Cypripedium macranthos II/B... 59 Cypripedium margaritaceum II/B... 62 Cypripedium micranthum II/B... 63 Appendix................ 64

Introduction and summary This document provides reviews of 25 species/country combinations of species from Asia and Oceania currently subject to long-standing Article 4.6(b) import suspensions. The document is provided to inform discussions by the Scientific Review Group (SRG) as to whether these trade restrictions may still be warranted. Trade data were downloaded from the CITES Trade Database on 03/02/2016 and the full dataset is available here: https://db.tt/3dwsozys (direct trade) and https://db.tt/qixlz0um (indirect trade). 1

. 2

PSITTACIFORMES: PSITTACIDAE Psittrichas fulgidus II/B SYNONYMS: Banksianus fulgidus COMMON NAMES: Vulturine Parrot (EN), Psittrichas de Pesquet (FR), Loro aguileño (ES) RANGE STATES: UNDER REVIEW: EU DECISIONS: IUCN: Indonesia, Papua New Guinea Indonesia, Papua New Guinea Current Article 4.6(b) import restriction for wild specimens from Indonesia and Papua New Guinea first applied on 22/12/1997 and last confirmed on 28/05/2015. Vulnerable Trade patterns Psittrichas fulgidus was listed in Appendix III by Ghana on 26/02/1976 and was included in Appendix II on 06/06/1981 under the order listing for Psittaciformes. It was included in Annex B of the EU Wildlife Trade Regulations on 01/06/1997, also as part of the order listing. Indonesia Indonesia have not published annual export quotas for P. fulgidus for the period 2005-2016, and have submitted annual reports for all years 2005-2014; the 2014 data was not received in time for inclusion in this report. Direct exports of P. fulgidus from Indonesia to the EU-28 2005-2014 comprised very low levels of live, captive-bred individuals for captive breeding or commercial purposes (Table 1). Direct trade in P. fulgidus from Indonesia to countries other than the EU-28 2005-2014 comprised live, captive-bred individuals for the purpose of commercial trade (Table 1). No indirect trade in P. fulgidus originating in Indonesia to the EU-28 was reported 2005-2014. Table 1: Direct exports of Psittrichas fulgidus from Indonesia to the EU-28 and the rest of the world (RoW), 2005-2014. All trade was in live, captivebred individuals. Importer Purpose Reported by 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 EU28 B Importer 6 8 6 T Importer 3 6 6 7 8 8 6 4 RoW T Importer 6 34 6 6 34 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 03/02/2016 Papua New Guinea 3

Papua New Guinea has not published any export quotas for P. fulgidus 2005-2016 and have not yet submitted an annual report for 2014. No direct or indirect trade in P. fulgidus from Papua New Guinea to the EU-28 or the rest of the world was reported over the period 2005-2014. Conservation status Psittrichas fulgidus is a large species of parrot (Low, 1990) endemic to the island of New Guinea (Mack and Wright, 1998). It was reported to be patchily distributed (Mack and Wright, 1998) within primary and tall secondary forest in foothills and lower mountains, with the majority of records within an altitude of 500 to 1800 m (Mack and Wright, 1998), although it was occasionally found at lower altitudes (Collar and Kirwan 2013; Mack and Wright, 1998). It is a specialised frugivore, feeding on a few species of fig in the wild, although it can survive on other fruits in captivity (Pryor et al., 2001). It relies on large cavities in trees for nest sites (Mack and Wright, 1998; Igag, 2003) and both parents feed the young (Kagl et al., 2015). Based on captive birds, the life span is around 20-40 years (Mack and Wright, 1998) and the usual brood size was reported to be two (Collar and Kirwan, 2013) although hunters in Papua New Guinea reported that only one egg is laid in the wild (Kagl et al., 2015). P. fulgidus was categorised as Vulnerable by the IUCN in 2012, as the species was suspected to be undergoing a rapid population decline over three generations (BirdLife International, 2012). P. fulgidus was found to be generally rare within its range (BirdLife International, 2012) and there is evidence that this species has been extirpated from some areas of forest (Snyder et al., 2000) particularly from areas of forest near human habitation (Collar and Kirwan, 2013). The highest densities of P. fulgidus were recorded in tracts of relatively undisturbed forest (Juniper and Parr, 1998), although it was noted that there have been very few studies into population size (Snyder et al., 2000). The only population estimate for P. fulgidus of 21 000 pairs was considered to be a crude estimate based on two pairs inhabiting an area of 14 km 2 at Crater Mountain in Papua New Guinea, which was extrapolated based on the available suitable habitat within the correct altitudinal range (Mack and Wright, 1998). The authors reported that this may be an overestimation, which is supported by another study at Crater Mountain in 2002 that estimated the population density of P. fulgidus to be one bird per km 2 (Marsden and Symes, 2006). Conversely, it was noted that the estimate may be an underestimate as it does not account for populations at lower altitudes (BirdLife International, 2015). The main threat facing this species was considered to be hunting for feathers, which are highly prized for their use in ceremonial headdresses worn in New Guinea (Mack and Wright, 1998; Woxvold et al., 2015). However, it has been reported that hunting levels have decreased since the introduction of a law that prevents killing of birds with non-traditional means (BirdLife International, 2015). Plumes were reported to also occasionally be sold to tourists, despite it being illegal to take them out of the country (BirdLife International, 2015). Hunting for meat was also considered to be a threat and the species was reported to have been extirpated from many areas due to hunting (Snyder et al., 2000). Deforestation was not considered a major threat to this species, as fig trees, on which this species relies, are not targeted (BirdLife International, 2015). However, the targeted felling of trees or damage to cavities to obtain P. fulgidus chicks was reported to potentially have a detrimental effect on breeding by limiting the availability of suitable nesting sites (Mack and Wright, 1998). The species has been reported to be harvested for the pet trade, but this was considered to pose less of a threat than hunting (Collar & Kirwan 2013). Indonesia: Psittrichas fulgidus was reported to be patchily distributed in West Papua and Papua in primary and tall secondary forest (BirdLife International, 2012). It was reported to range from the Tamrau Mountains, Vogelkop, western Papua and east through the Snow Mountains (Juniper and Parr, 1998). 4

The species was reported to be generally rare within Indonesia (BirdLife International, 2012). No surveys of population size have been reported in Indonesia and therefore the population size within Indonesia is unknown. P. fulgidus is listed as a protected species in the 1999 Indonesian Government Regulation No. 7, which covers the protection of wild plants and animals (Republic of Indonesia, 1999). According to the Indonesian Republic Act No 5/1990, catching, killing, trade and possession of protected wildlife is prohibited (Republic of Indonesia, 1990). However, TRAFFIC reported that penalties for possession or trade of protected species was very lenient (Nash, 1992). Papua New Guinea: P. fulgidus was reported to be patchily distributed in Papua New Guinea within primary and tall secondary forest (BirdLife International, 2012). It was reported to occur in the mountain ranges from the Central Ranges (including the upper Fly River, Lake Kutubu and Karimui districts) to the Owen Stanley Range and Huon Peninsula in eastern Papua New Guinea (Juniper and Parr, 1998) and in the Western Hindenburg range (Richards and Whitmore, 2015; Woxvold et al., 2015) It was noted to have been historically and recently extirpated from large areas within Papua New Guinea (Coates 1985, Beehler et al. 1986, K. D. Bishop in litt. 1994, Mack and Wright 1998 in BirdLife International, 2015). Three surveys have recorded the presence of P. fulgidus in Papua New Guinea: Mack and Wright (1998) conducted field work at Crater Mountain Biological Research Station (10 km east of Haia in Chimbu Province) between October 1989 and June 1993. The authors reported that two or three pairs were resident within the study area of 14 km 2, but reported that this was likely to be unrepresentative of other areas in Papua New Guinea due to the relatively higher density of food plants within the study area. Marsden and Symes (2006) estimated the population density to be one ind/km 2 within the Crater Mountain Wildlife Management Area in 2002. P. fulgidus was observed during rapid biodiversity assessments of the Hindenburg range in February 2013, with one individual found at the OK Menga dam in Tabubil (Woxvold et al., 2015). Local community members reported the species as one of the most important for hunters and as abundant in the area (Kagl et al., 2015). No population estimates solely for Papua New Guinea have been reported, although the global population estimate for this species was noted to be based on population estimates from Papua New Guinea (Mack and Wright, 1998). In 1998, Mack and Wright (1998) reported that they believed that demand for feathers of P. fulgidus was growing within Papua New Guinea based on the popularity of traditional dress and the rate of human population increase. However, in the Hindenburg range these threats were reported to be smaller due to a decreasing human population, but increasing threats to habitats from fires and mining activity were noted (Richards and Whitmore, 2015). The species is listed as protected under the Papua New Guinea Fauna (Protection & Control) Act 1966 (Woxvold et al., 2015). No additional information on the conservation status or management of this species in Papua New Guinea was identified. References BirdLife International 2015. Pesquet s Parrot (Psittrichas fulgidus) - BirdLife species factsheet. Available at: http://www.birdlife.org/datazone/speciesfactsheet.php?id=1447. [Accessed: 26/08/2015]. BirdLife International 2012. Psittrichas fulgidus. The IUCN Red List of Threateded Species version 2015.2. Available at: http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/22685025/0. [Accessed: 26/08/2015]. Collar, N. and Kirwan, G.M. 2013. Pesquet s Parrot (Psittrichas fulgidus). In: del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A., Sargatal, J., Christie, D.A. & de Juana, E. (2013). (Ed.). Available at: 5

http://www.hbw.com/node/54481 on 25 August 2015. [Accessed: 25/08/2015]. Igag, P. 2003. Breeding biology and reproductive success of three large Rainforest parrots; Palm cockatoo Probosciger aterrimus, Vulturine s parrot Psittrichas fulgidus and Eclectus parrot Eclectus roratus, in New Guinea. Australian National University. Juniper, T. and Parr, M. 1998. Parrots: a guide to the parrots of the world. Pica Press, Robertsbridge, UK. Kagl, J.P., Whitmore, N. and Aplin, K. 2015. Traditional and local ecological knowledge. In: Richards, S. and Whitmore, N. (Eds.). A rapid biodiversity assessment of Papua New Guinea s Hindenburg Wall region. Wildlife Conservation Society, Papua New Guinea. 3 13. Low, R. 1990. Breeding Pesquet s parrot: Psittrichas fulgidus at Loro Parque, Tenerife. International Zoo Yearbook, 29(1): 102 108. Mack, A.L. and Wright, D.D. 1998. The Vulturine Parrot, Psittrichas fulgidus, a threatened New Guinea endemic: notes on its biology and conservation. Bird Conservation International, 8(2): 185 194. Marsden, S.J. and Symes, C.T. 2006. Abundance and habitat associations of parrots from a hillforest, Papua New Guinea. Pacific Conservation Biology, 12: 15 21. Nash, S. 1992. Parrot trade records for Irian Jaya, Indonesia, 1985-1990. TRAFFIC Bulletin, 13(1): 42 45. Pryor, G.S., Levey, D.J. and Dierenfeld, E.S. 2001. Protein Requirements of a Specialized Frugivore, Pesquet s Parrot (Psittrichas fulgidus). The Auk, 118(4): 1080 1088. Republic of Indonesia 1999. Indonesian Government Regulation No. 7 concerning the preservation of wild plants and animals. Indonesia. Republic of Indonesia 1990. The Indonesian Republic Act No 5/1990 on the conservation of bio natural resources and its ecosystem. Richards, S. and Whitmore, N. 2015. A rapid biodiversity assessment of Papua New Guinea s Hindenburg Wall region A Rapid Biodiversity Assessment of Papua New Guinea s Hindenburg Wall Region. Wildife Conservation Society, Papua New Guinea Snyder, N., Mcgowan, P., Gilardi, J. and Grajal, A. 2000. Parrots. Status survey and conservation action plan 2000-2004. IUCN, Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. Woxvold, I., Ken, B. and Aplin, K.P. 2015. Birds. In: Richards, S. and Whitmore, N. (Eds.). A rapid biodiversity assessment of Papua New Guinea s Hindenburg Wall region. Wildlife Conservation Society, Papua New Guinea. 103 130. 6

SAURIA: VARANIDAE Varanus beccarii II/B SYNONYMS: Monitor beccarii,, Monitor kordensis beccarii, Varanus prasinus beccarii COMMON NAMES: Black Tree Monitor (EN), Varan arboricole noir (FR), Varano arborícola negro (ES) RANGE STATES: UNDER REVIEW: EU DECISIONS: IUCN: Indonesia Indonesia Current Article 4.6(b) import restriction for wild specimens from Indonesia first applied on 22/12/1997 and last confirmed on 28/05/2015. Not assessed Taxonomic Note Varanus beccarii was originally considered to be a subspecies of Varanus prasinus, but was later elevated to species level (Fischer, 2012). The CITES standard reference to this effect was adopted at CoP15 (Koch et al., 2010) Trade patterns Varanus beccarii was listed in Appendix II on 01/07/1975 as part of the genus listing for Varanus and was included in Annex B of the EU Wildlife Trade Regulations on 01/06/1997, also as part of a genus listing. Indonesia has not published annual export quotas for V. beccarii for the period 2005-2016 and have submitted annual reports for all years 2005-2014; however, Indonesia s data for 2014 was not received in time to be included in this report. Direct exports of V. beccarii from Indonesia to the EU-28 2005-2014 comprised primarily of moderate levels of live, captive-produced individuals for commercial purposes (Table 1). Direct trade in V. beccarii from Indonesia to countries other than the EU-28 2005-2014 comprised primarily of live, captive produced individuals for the purpose of commercial trade, with a very small number of live, wild sourced individuals traded for commercial purposes (reported by importers only; Table 1). Indirect trade in V. beccarii to the EU-28 originating in Indonesia 2005-2014 involved very low levels of live, captive produced individuals, all re-exported via the United States for commercial purposes in 2009 (one according to both exports and importers) and 2011 (six according to exporters and four according to importers). Table 1: Direct exports of Varanus beccarii from Indonesia to the EU-28 and the rest of the world (RoW) 2005-2014. All trade was in live individuals. Importer Purpose Source Reported by 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 EU28 B C Importer 2 7

P F Importer 2 S F Importer 2 T C Importer 44 18 4 22 29 15 96 11 54 37 F Importer 10 78 26 50 122 61 24 41 57 108 12 21 55 27 6 13 RoW T C Importer 14 7 26 15 54 34 17 222 52 467 119 F Importer 6 78 98 14 33 56 112 100 73 14 171 168 116 133 327 4 347 I Importer 5 2 W Importer 2 2 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 03/02/2016. Conservation status Indonesia: Varanus beccarii is a species of tree monitor endemic to the Aru Islands, Indonesia (Marshall and Beehler, 2007), a group of 95 islands 150 km south west of West Papua (Fischer, 2012). It is arboreal, occurs in humid forests (Sprackland, 1991) and feeds on a range of insects (Fischer, 2012) as well as crabs, reptiles and amphibians (De Lisle, 1996; Bennett, 1998 in Arbuckle, 2009). The species has been successfully bred in captivity (Mendyk, 2012) with captive females laying clutches of two to four eggs (Greene 1986, Garrett and Peterson 1991, Horn and Visser 1991, Dedlmar 1994, Eidenmüller 1998, Bennett 1998, Bosch 1999, Kok 2000 in Green, 2004). Captive individuals reached sexual maturity at around two years (Green, 2004). Fischer (2012) reported that little was known about the ecology of V. beccarii, but that it was assumed to be similar to V. prasinus, which are generally arboreal but possibly descending to the ground to seek out prey. V. beccarii has not been assessed for the IUCN Red List, but Pernetta (2009) reported that the species was naturally rare due to its limited distribution (Fischer, 2012). Koch et al. (2013) reported arboreal species, endemic to small islands and associated with pristine rain forest such as V. beccarii are the most likely species within the genus to go extinct. Koch et al. (2013) also added that conservation of V. beccarii was of severe concern due to its restricted distribution and collection from the wild. Auliya (in litt. to UNEP-WCMC, 2015) reported that there was no information on the population size of the species, and Koch et al. (2013) reported that data was lacking on the population and conservation status of V. beccarii. Auliya (in litt. to UNEP-WCMC, 2015) also noted that there was no information available on the management of V. beccarii or an assessment of the impact of harvest on the species. V. beccarii is not legally protected in Indonesia and since 2005, no annual export quota has been set (Koch et al., 2013). Live individuals are harvested for the pet trade (Ziegler et al., 2007; Koch et al., 2013), which was considered to pose a threat to the species (Koch et al., 2010). Pernetta (2009) suggested that V. beccarii may be significantly impacted by low levels of harvesting due to its limited distribution. Auliya (in litt. to UNEP-WCMC, 2015) added that laundering of wild specimens as captive bred or farmed was strongly suspected and that the slow reproductive rate of the species meant it was not considered suitable for breeding regularly on a commercial scale. Deforestation also poses a potential threat to the species (Hamburger, 2010; Koch et al., 2013). References Arbuckle, K. 2009. Ecological Function of Venom in Varanus, with a Compilation of Dietary Records from the Literature. Biawak, 3(2): 46 56. Auliya, M. 2015. Mark Auliya (IUCN Monitor Lizard Specialist Group) in litt. to UNEP-WCMC 2015. Bennett, D. 1998. Monitor lizards: natural history, biology and husbandry. Chimaira, Frankfurt am 8

Main. Bennett, D. 1998. Monitor lizards: Natural history, biology and husbandry. Frankfurt am Main: Edition Chimaira. Bosch, H. 1999. Successul breeding of the emerald monitor (Varanus p. prasinus) in the Löbbecke Museum + Aquazoo, Düsseldorf (Germany). Mertensiella, 11:225-226. Dedlmar, A. 1994. Haltung und Nachzucht de Smaragdwarans (Varanus (Ordatria) prasinus). Salamandra, 30: 234-240. Eidenmüller, B. 1998. Bemerkungen zur Haltung und Nachtzung von Varanus p. prasinus (Schlegel, 1839) und V. p. beccarii (Doria, 1874). Herpetofauna, 20:8-13. Fischer, D. 2012. Notes on the husbandry and breeding of the black tree monitor Varanus (Euprepiosaurus) beccarii (Doria, 1874). Biawak, 6(2): 79 87. Green, H.W. 2004. Varanus prasinus. In: Pianka, E., King, D. and King, R. (Eds.). Varanoid lizards of the world. Indiana University Press, Bloomington & Indianapolis. 225 229. Garrett, C.M. and Peterson, M.C. 1991. Varanus prasinus beccarii (NCN) behaviour. Herpetol. Rev., 22:99-100. Horn, H.G. and Visser, G.J. 1991. Basic data on the biology of monitors. Mertensiella, 2:176-187. Hamburger, J. 2010. Petition to list 15 bat species under the endangered species act. (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.). In: U.S. Secretary of Interior Acting through the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. WildEarth Guardians, Denver, USA. Koch, A., Auliya, M. and Ziegler, T. 2010. Updated checklist of the living monitor lizards of the world (Squamata: Varanidae). Bonn Zoological Bulletin, 57(2): 127 136. Koch, A., Ziegler, T., Bohme, W., Arida, E. and Auliya, M. 2013. Pressing problems: distribution, threats and conservation status of the monitor lizards (Varanidae: Varanus Spp.) of Southeast Asia and the Indo-Australian Archipelago. Herpetological Conservation and Biology, 8(3): 1 62. Kok R. 2000. Ervaringen en geslaagde kweek met de smaragdvaraan, Varanus prasinus (Schlegel, 1839). Lacerta, 58:109-112. De Lisle, H.F. 1996. The Natural History of Monitor Lizards. Krieger Publishing Company, Malabar, Florida. Marshall, A.J. and Beehler, B.M. 2007. The Ecology of Papua: Part One. Periplus Editions, Singapore. 784 pp. Mendyk, R.W. 2012. Reproduction of Varanid Lizards (Reptilia: Squamata: Varanidae) at the Bronx Zoo. Zoo Biology, 31: 374 389. Pernetta, A.P. 2009. Monitoring the trade: using the CITES database to examine the global trade in live monitor lizards (Varanus spp.). Biawak, 3(2): 37 45. Sprackland, R.G. 1991. Taxonomic review of the Varanus prasinus group with descriptions of two new species. 561 576 pp. Ziegler, T., Schmitz, A., Koch, A. and Böhme, W. 2007. A review of the subgenus Euprepiosaurus of Varanus (Squamata: Varanidae): morphological and molecular phylogeny, distribution and zoogeography, with an identification key for the members of the V. indicus and the V. prasinus species group. Zootaxa, 2007(1472): 1 28. 9

SERPENTES: PYTHONIDAE Morelia boeleni II/B SYNONYMS: Liasis boeleni, Liasis taronga, Python boeleni, Simalia boeleni COMMON NAMES: Boelen's Python (EN), Python de Boelen (FR), Pitón de Boelen (ES) RANGE STATES: UNDER REVIEW: EU DECISIONS: IUCN: Indonesia, Papua New Guinea Indonesia Current Article 4.6(b) import restriction for wild specimens from Indonesia first applied on 24/09/2000 and last confirmed on 28/05/2015. Previous negative opinion formed on 26/11/1998. Not assessed Trade patterns Morelia boeleni was listed in Appendix II on 01/07/1975 and in Annex B of the EU Wildlife Trade Regulations on 01/06/1997 as part of the family listing for Pythonidae. Indonesia has not published annual export quotas for M. boeleni for the period 2005-2016. Indonesia s annual report for 2014 was not received in time to be included in this report. Direct exports of M. boeleni from Indonesia to the EU-28 2005-2014 comprised low levels of live, captive-sourced individuals for commercial purposes (Table 1). Direct trade in M. boeleni from Indonesia to countries other than the EU-28 2005-2014 also primarily comprised moderate levels of live, captive-sourced individuals for the purposes of commercial trade (Table 1). Indirect trade in M. boeleni from Indonesia to the EU-28 2005-2014 comprised of 2 live, captive-sourced individuals exported via Switzerland for commercial purposes in 2014 (reported by the importer only). Table 1: Direct exports of Morelia boeleni from Indonesia to the EU-28 and the rest of the world (RoW) 2005-2014. All trade was in live individuals. Importer Purpose Source Reported by 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 EU28 T C Importer 13 23 19 28 8 F Importer 22 23 12 41 27 81 8 29 32 10 22 33 2 63 43 20 6 32 RoW B C Importer 10 P C Importer 2 T C Importer 4 7 23 16 2 12 79 27 F Importer 8 58 36 41 45 13 52 18 25 50 50 92 68 116 63 40 97 W Importer 4 Source: CITES Trade Database, UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK, downloaded on 03/02/2016 Conservation status 10

Morelia boeleni is endemic to New Guinea (Austin et al., 2010). M. boeleni is found in highlands above 1000 m and below the tree line (Austin et al., 2010; O Shea, 1996), with a preference for montane rainforests between 2000-27 000 m (Baldogo and Spataro, 2006 in Lettoof, 2015). The species recorded distribution is patchy and ranges from Wissel Lakes in West Papua, to the highlands of Papua New Guinea and high mountains above Port Moresby, Papua New Guinea (O Shea, 2011). Isolated populations have also been recorded on Huon Peninsula and Goodenough Island, Papua New Guinea (Austin et al., 2010). The population is considered evenly spread between Indonesia and Papua New Guinea (Lettoof, 2015). M. boeleni is oviparous with an average clutch size of 14 eggs (O Shea, 2011) and a maximum clutch size of 25 (Reed, 2005). The reported breeding success in captivity from private collections and zoological institutions is very low (O Shea, 2011; Lettoof, 2015). M. boeleni has not yet been assessed by the IUCN Red List, but Austin et al. (2010) stated that wild populations did not seem to be threatened. Similarly, O Shea (2011) reported that the species is probably neither rare nor endangered, just rarely encountered due to its remote habitat. However, the species is one of the least studied pythons (O Shea, 2011), and there are no data available on the population size and very little accurate distributional data (Austin et al., 2010). Little information about threats to the species was found. However, as an attractive python, there is a market for harvesting M. boeleni for the pet trade (O Shea, 2011), and it is also occasionally hunted for meat (O Shea, 2009). Lettoof (2015) reported that the low genetic variability of the species implied low resilience to use, but that the distribution, habitat specificity and reproductive output of M. boeleni implied medium resilience to use. Indonesia: M. boeleni has only been recorded in scattered areas of West Papua, most notably around Wissel Lakes (O Shea, 1996). Austin et al. (2010) noted that no population surveys had been carried out in Indonesia and that the population size or trends within the country were unknown. M. boeleni was reportedly not protected in Indonesia (Lettoof, 2015; Iskandar and Erdelen, 2006), and Lettoof (2015) reported there was no management plan for this species. Lettoof (2015) noted that no quota for wild-sourced specimens had been published by Indonesia since 2001 and that exports reported as farmed or captive-bred since 2001 were likely to be wild caught, owing to the difficulty in successfully breeding this species in captivity. A proposal to legally protect M. boeleni in Indonesia was reported which would prohibit trade of wild specimens for skins or the pet trade (Mumpuni and Hamdiy, n.d.), although no acceptance of this proposal was found. Wild harvesting is reported to be carried out by local people locating females brooding eggs, artificially incubating the eggs and then removing the neonates for the pet trade (Lettoof, 2015). Eleven of fifteen traders surveyed in Indonesia reported some species, including M. boeleni, had become scarce due to over-collection and habitat loss (Natusch and Lyons, 2012). Lettoof (2015) reported that although the impact of collection for the pet trade had not been studied, given the type and extent of wild harvesting, current trade levels were unlikely to pose a threat to the species. References Austin, C.C., Spataro, M., Peterson, S., Jordan, J. and McVay, J.D. 2010. Conservation genetics of Boelen s python (Morelia boeleni) from New Guinea: reduced genetic diversity and divergence of captive and wild animals. Conservation Genetics, (11): 889 896. Baldogo and Spataro 2006. The Boelen s Python Group. Available at: http://www.boelenspythons.com/home.html. [Accessed: 26/08/2015]. Iskandar, D.T. and Erdelen, W.R. 2006. Conservation of amphibians and reptiles in Indonesia: issues and problems. Amphibian and Reptile Conservation, 4(1): 60 87. Lettoof, D. 2015. Snake trade and conservation management (Serpentes.spp.) An assessment of the 11

impact of the pet trade on five CITES-Appendix II case studies Morelia boeleni. Convention of International trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, Available at: https://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/com/ac/28/inf/e-ac28-inf-05.pdf. Marshall, A.J. and Beehler, B.M. 2007. The Ecology of Papua: Part One. Periplus Editions, Singapore. 784 pp. Mumpuni and Hamdiy, A. n.d. Usulan Sanca Bulan Simalia boeleni (Brongersma, 1953) untuk masuk dalam daftar satwa liar yang dilindungi undang-undang Republik Indonesia. Available at: https://xa.yimg.com/kq/groups/20809606/1039705886/name/simalia+boeleni.pdf. [Accessed: 26/08/2015]. Natusch, D.J.D. and Lyons, J.A. 2012. Exploited for pets: the harvest and trade of amphibians and reptiles from Indonesian New Guinea. Biodiversity and Conservation, 21: 2899 2911. O Shea, M. 1996. A guide to the snakes of Papua New Guinea. Independent Publishing, Independent Group Pty Ltd. O Shea, M. 2011. Boas and pythons of the world. New Holland, London, UK. 160 pp. O Shea, M. 2009. Threats to the Boelen s python. In: Flagle, A.R. and Stoops, E.D. (Eds.). Black Python Morelia boeleni. 80 91. Available at: http://www.researchgate.net/profile/mark_oshea/publication/267150405_threats_to_the_boelen s_python/links/54462d640cf22b3c14de1133.pdf. [Accessed: 26/08/2015]. Reed, R.N. 2005. An ecological risk assessment of non-native boas and pythons as potentially invasive species in the United States. Risk Analysis, 25(3): 753 766. 12

TESTUDINES: GEOEMYDIDAE Batagur borneoensis II/B SYNONYMS: Batagur picta, Callagur borneoensis, Callagur picta, Emys borneoensis, Kachuga brookei, Kachuga major COMMON NAMES: Painted Batagur (EN), Émyde peinte de Bornéo (FR), Galápago pintado (ES) RANGE STATES: UNDER REVIEW: EU DECISIONS: IUCN: Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia, Malaysia, Thailand Current Article 4.6(b) import restriction for wild specimens from Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand first applied on 24/09/2000 and last confirmed on 28/05/2015. Previous negative opinions for the four countries formed on 23/06/1999. Critically Endangered (needs updating) Taxonomic note Batagur borneoensis was previously described and is occasionally referred to in the literature as Callagur borneoensis, but reassigned to the genus Batagur by Praschag et al. (2007). Trade patterns Batagur borneoensis was listed in Appendix II on 18/09/1997 under its synonym Callagur borneoensis and was maintained in Appendix II on 12/06/2013 with the addition of the annotation Zero quota for wild specimens of commercial purposes. It was listed in Annex B of the EU Wildlife Trade Regulations in 2010. Annual reports have not yet been received from Brunei Darussalam for 2013 and 2014, while Indonesia s 2014 annual report was not received in time to be included in this report. All range States of this species have been subject to a zero quota for wild specimens for commercial purposes since 2013, based on the Appendix II listing annotation. In addition, Malaysia has published annual export quotas of zero for B. borneoensis every year for the period 2007-2016; there has been no reported trade during the period 2007-2014. No direct trade in B. borneoensis from Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia, Malaysia or Thailand to the EU-28 or the rest of the world, or indirect trade to the EU-28 was reported over the period 2005-2014. Conservation status Batagur borneoensis is a large species of terrapin (Hawkins, 2010) that has been recorded in Brunei Darussalam, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand (Asian Turtle Trade Working Group, 2000). Its distribution has been reported to include southern Thailand, north eastern Sumatra and Kalimantan in Indonesia, Sarawak and Peninsula Malaysia, and Brunei Darussalam (Jenkins, 1995; Bonin et al., 2006). B. borneoensis was reported to occur in freshwater rivers (Guntoro, 2012) and mangroves (Jenkins, 1995). Females have been reported to travel up to 3 km from rivers to sea beaches to lay their eggs, which then incubate for 70-90 days and hatchlings swim back to the estuarine habitat (Bonin et al., 2006; Hawkins, 2010). Females were reported to breed up to three times a season (Bonin et al., 2006) with an average clutch size of around 10-16 eggs (Das, 2010). The species has been reported to not survive well in captivity (Bonin et al., 2006), although there have been cases of successful breeding (Barber, 2007 in Hawkins, 2010). 13

B. borneoensis was classified as Critically Endangered by the IUCN (Asian Turtle Trade Working Group, 2000) and populations were reported to be declining (Turtle Conservation Coalition et al., 2011). The species was listed in the top 25 most endangered tortoises and freshwater turtles at extremely high risk of extinction in 2011 (Turtle Conservation Coalition et al., 2011) No reports of global population size were available but populations were reported to be in serious decline (Turtle Conservation Coalition et al., 2011). Within Malaysia, which was reported to be a stronghold for this species (Ac22 Doc 10.2), individual nesting populations were reported as small; only one or two rivers held more than 100 nesting females (Jenkins, 1995). B. borneoensis is subject to a zero quota for wild specimens for commercial purposes which was first accepted in June 2013 (CoP16 Prop. 32). The species was reported to be threatened by over-exploitation for consumption of its meat and eggs (CoP10 Prop 10.58) as hunters exploit the predictability of feeding and nesting patterns to collect eggs (Turtle Conservation Fund, 2003). Harvesting for the pet trade was also considered a threat to the species as well as habitat destruction of freshwater rivers and mangroves and nesting sites (Moll, 1990; Bonin et al., 2006). Brunei Darussalam: The status or distribution of B. borneoensis within Brunei Darussalam was reported to be unknown (Ac22 Doc 10.2) although in 1996, it was reported that the species was occasionally encountered in mangrove and estuarine habitat within the country (CoP10 Prop 10.58). B. borneoensis was not listed as protected in Brunei Darussalam (Ac22 Doc 10.2). Destruction and pollution of mangroves was considered a possible threat by limiting habitat availability (CoP10 Prop 10.58). Indonesia: B. borneoensis has been recorded from Kalimantan and Sumatra (Moll, 1990). The species was reported as common and widespread by Yuwono (1994 in CoP10 Prop 10.58) but as rare by other sources (Wirjoatmodjo 1996 in CoP10 Prop 10.58). In 1996, the species was reportedly declining within Indonesia but the decline was not considered rapid (CoP10 Prop 10.58). Between November 1989 and March 1990, surveys of 58 major rivers in South Sumatra and Lampung recorded one B. borneoensis individual at Sangai Somor (Moll, 1990). Reports potentially referring to B. borneoensis were provided from 10 rivers in the central and southern portions of the study area, but due to the large number of common names used, the identity of the species could not be confirmed (Moll, 1990). TRAFFIC reported six individuals at markets in Jakarta between August and November 2004 (Shepherd and Nijman, 2007), but none were found in 2010 (Stengel et al., 2011). TRAFFIC reported that the species was included in wider legislation, which required licences from the forest protection and nature conservation (PHKA) to be acquired for the capture and distribution of wild animals within Indonesia (Shepherd and Nijman, 2007; Stengel et al., 2011). B. borneoensis was not included in the 1999 list of protected species in Indonesia (Indonesian Government Regulation No. 7, 1999) but a report in 2012 stated that it was being considered for protection (Guntoro, 2012) Prior to expansion of logging, there was no local demand for meat as the local Muslim population do not eat turtle meat, but workers from elsewhere for the logging industry created a demand and there was also reported to be a demand for the eggs of the species (Moll, 1990). Habitat destruction was also considered a threat (Moll, 1990). Malaysia: B. borneoensis was reported to be distributed from the northern state of Perlis to the southern state of Johor as well as in Sarawak (AC22 DOC 10.2). The status of B. borneoensis in Sabah is unclear; it was considered present in 1996 (Sharma 1996a in CoP10 Prop 58) but in 2006 van Dijk (in litt., 2006 in AC22 Doc. 10.2) reported the species had never been recorded in Sabah. Malaysia was reported 14

to be the last stronghold for B. borneoensis; a population estimate was provided from van Dijk of no more than a few thousand individuals within peninsular Malaysia but Chan (in litt. 2006 in AC22 Doc 10.2) suggested this figure was a gross over-estimate (AC22 Doc 10.2). A population of 200 individuals was estimated on the Setiu River in Terengganu, from a sampling programme between 2003 and 2005, while 600-700 individuals had been estimated in 2002 also on the Setiu River (AC22 Doc 10.2). Social surveys of fishers, egg collectors and other knowledgeable people to determine the distribution of B. borneoensis (referred to as Callagur borneoensis) and Batagur baska were carried out in 1989 and 1990 along rivers in the southern half of Malaysia, from Kula Selangor around the peninsular to Pahang river as well a survey in northern Terengganu and the Kelantan river (Moll, 1990). The author reported that B. borneoensis was widely distributed in peninsular Malaysia but the species was not found to be common on any of the rivers. They also reported a few B. borneoensis nests on the mouth of the river Kelantan (Moll, 1990). Jenkins (2005) reported that individual nesting populations within Malaysia were very small with only the Setiu and Paka rivers reported to hold more than 100 nesting females each. No estimate of population size was made (Moll, 1990). B. borneoensis were reported to have declined in Malaysia as a result of unsustainable harvesting and a paucity of co-ordinated conservation efforts (Turtle Conservation Coalition et al., 2011). It was reported that, within Sarawak, B. borneoensis was listed as a totally protected species (AC22 DOC 10.2). Furthermore, Customs Orders of 1988 banned the export and import of all turtle eggs from Sarawak (AC22 Doc 10.2). C. borneoensis was listed on the first schedule of the Wildlife Conservation Act 2010, which lists protected wildlife (Malaysia Wildlife Conservation Act, 2010). According to this act, a licence is required to hunt or keep the species, take or keep any part or derivative of the species, or to trade any part or derivative of the species (Malaysia Wildlife Conservation Act, 2010). Within Malaysia, egg harvesting was only permitted by licensed collectors under the condition that a percentage of their collection was sold to the Malaysian Fisheries Department to be incubated at hatcheries (CoP10 Prop 10.58). However, it was reported that collectors could receive a better price on the open market so there was no incentive to sell to the state (CoP10 Prop 10.58). Jenkins (1995) reported that over harvesting for eggs was one of the main reasons for the decline of B. borneoensis in Malaysia, but that there was only small scale export of adults for the pet trade. Hatcheries were reported to have been opened to help conserve the species (Bonin et al., 2006), but the number of clutches protected by conservation efforts in Terengganu was reported to have declined from several hundred to less than 100 in 2010 (Turtle Conservation Coalition et al., 2011). Thailand: In the 1990s, B. borneoensis was virtually extinct in Thailand (Jenkins, 1995) with only one confirmed population. Moll (1990) recorded a population of 47 B. borneoensis individuals held at the Freshwater Wildlife Preservation Station in Klong La-ngu River in Satun Province while surveying several provinces in southern Thailand. By 1993, this population was reported to be 80-100 individuals with a few hundred hatchlings per year (van Dijk 1996 in CoP10 Prop 10.58). No more recent information on the population in Thailand could be located. In Thailand, B. borneoensis was protected from exploitation by the Wild Animal reservation and protection Act B.E. 2535, which prohibited the use and killing of the species for domestic or export purposes, with the exception of capture for purposes such as scientific research (AC22 DOC 10.2). 15

Historical population declines of the species in Thailand were reported to be due to the widespread destruction of mangrove habitats as well as over-exploitation of eggs and adults for consumption (Jenkins, 1995; CoP10 Prop 10.58). References Asian Turtle Trade Working Group 2000. Batagur borneoensis. Available at: The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2015.2. [Accessed: 01/09/2015]. Barber, D. 2007. Painted terrapin (Callagur borneoensis). North American Regional Studbook, Fort Worth Zoo Bonin, F., Devaux, B. and Dupré, A. 2006. Turtles of the world. A&C Black, London (UK). 416 pp. Chan, E.H. 2006 Chan E.H. (IUCN/SSC Tortoise and Freshwater Turtle Specialist Group) in litt. to IUCN/SSC 2006 in: AC22 Doc 10.2. Das, I. 2010. A field guide to the reptiles of South-East Asia. Bloomsbury Publishing Plc. van Dijk, P. 1996 in litt. to the CITES Scientific Authority of the Federal Republic of Germany in:cop10 Prop 10.58. van Dijk, P.P. 2006. van Dijk, P.P IUCN/SSC Tortoise and Freshwater Turtle SG in litt. to IUCN/SSC 2006 in: AC22 Doc 10.2. Guntoro, J. 2012. The Body Size and Some Field Notes of Painted Terrapin (Batagur borneoensis) in District of Aceh Tamiang, Indonesia. Asian Journal of Conservation Biology, 1(2): 74 77. Hawkins, M.E. 2010. Genetic analysis of the captive breeding program for the critically endangered painted terrapin, Batagur borneoensis. MSc Thesis. Texas Christian University. Jenkins, M. 1995. Tortoises and freshwater turtles: the trade in South East Asia. TRAFFIC International. Malaysia Wildlife Conservation Act 2010. Wildlife Conservation Act 716 (of 2010). Moll, E.O. 1990. Status and management of the river terrapin (Batagur baska) in tropical asia. Final report produced under WWF project no. 3901. Praschag, P., Hundsdörfer, A.K. and Fritz, U. 2007. Phylogeny and taxonomy of endangered South and South-east Asian freshwater turtles elucidated by mtdna sequence variation (Testudines: Geoemydidae: Batagur, Callagur, Hardella, Kachuga, Pangshura). Zoologica Scripta, 36(5): 429 442. Sharma, D.S.K. 1996 in litt. to the CITES Scientific Authority of the Federal Republic of Germany in:cop10 Prop 10.58. Shepherd, C.R. and Nijman, V. 2007. An overview of the regulation of the freshwater turtle and tortoise pet trade in Jakarta, Indonesia. TRAFFIC Southeast Asia, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia. 1-25 pp. Stengel, C., Shepherd, C. and Caillabet, O. 2011. The trade in tortoises and freshwater turtles in Jakarta revisited. TRAFFIC Southeast Asia, Petaling Jaya, Malaysia. 24 pp. Turtle Conservation Coalition, Rhodin, A.G.J., Walde, A.D., Horne, B.D., van Dijk, P.P., Blanck, T. and Hudson, R. 2011. Turtles in Trouble: The World s 25+ Most Endangered Tortoises and Freshwater Turtles 2011. Lunenburg, MA. 54 pp. Turtle Conservation Fund 2003. The world s top 25 most endangered turtles. Available at: http://www.turtleconservationfund.org/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/top25turtlesprofiles.pdf. [Accessed: 30/11/2015]. Wirjoatmodjo, S. 1996) in litt. to the CITES Scientific Authority of the Federal Republic of Germany in: CoP10 Prop 10.58. Yuwono, F. 1994 in litt. to the CITES Scientific Authority of the Federal Republic of Germany in:cop10 Prop 10.58. 16

TESTUDINES: GEOEMYDIDAE Cuora amboinensis II/B SYNONYMS: Emys cuoro, Terrapene bicolor, Testudo amboinensis, Testudo melanocephala COMMON NAMES: South Asian Box Turtle (EN), Tortue-boîte d'asie orientale (FR), Tortuga de caja malaya (ES) RANGE STATES: UNDER REVIEW: EU DECISIONS: Bangladesh, Brunei Darussalam, Cambodia, China (uncertain), India, Indonesia, Lao People's Democratic Republic, Malaysia, Myanmar Philippines, Singapore, Thailand, Viet Nam Malaysia Current Article 4.6(b) import restriction for wild specimens from Malaysia formed 01/03/2003 and last confirmed 28/05/2015. Previous negative opinion formed 27/0/2001. Current Article 4.6(b) import restriction for wild specimens from Indonesia formed 03/09/2008 and last confirmed 28/05/2015. Previous negative opinion formed 08/02/2007. IUCN: No opinion i) for wild specimens from Viet Nam formed 07/02/2013. Vulnerable (needs updating) Trade patterns Cuora amboinensis was listed in Appendix II on 19/07/2000 as part of the genus listing for Cuora, and was listed in Annex B of the EU Wildlife Trade Regulations on 18/12/2000 as part of the genus listing. Malaysia has submitted annual reports for all years 2005-2014. An annual zero export quota for Cuora amboinensis from Peninsular Malaysia has been published every year for the period 2007-2016; this quota has not been exceeded for the period 2007-2014. No direct or indirect trade in C. amboinensis from Malaysia to the EU-28 was reported over the period 2005-2014. Direct trade in C. amboinensis from Malaysia to countries other than the EU-28 2005-2014 consisted of 390 kg of wild-sourced carapace (reported by both importers and exporters) and 33,969 live wild-sourced individuals (reported by importers only) in 2005, all of which was for commercial purposes. Conservation status C. amboinensis is a small species of semi-aquatic turtle widely distributed across Southeast Asia, occurring in freshwater habitats from sea level to an altitude of 500 m (Schoppe and Das, 2011). The species was reported to occur in a range of habitats including swamps, marshes and permanent or temporary wetlands, as well as man-made habitats such as oil palm plantations and ponds (Schoppe, 2009; Schoppe and Das, 2011) that experience little or no current (Ernst et al., 2000). Adults were reported to often spend the night on land (Bonin et al., 2006). Females can reportedly lay three to four clutches of two to three eggs between early April and the end of June, with an incubation period of around one month (Bonin et al., 2006) although average fecundity is reportedly estimated at four to six eggs per mature female per year (AC18 Doc. 7.1). In captivity, a 17

hatching success of 50 per cent has been reported (Schoppe, 2008b) and sexual maturity has been observed at 5-6 years old for females and 8-9 years old in males (Praedicow, 1985 in Schoppe, 2009). A life expectancy of 25-30 years has been reported (Bowler 1977 in Schoppe and Das, 2011). Schoppe (2008a) considered that the slow reproductive rate of the species made the species more vulnerable to over-exploitation. C. amboinensis was assessed as Vulnerable by the IUCN in 2000 and the species was reported as Endangered in Bangladesh, Cambodia, Laos and Viet Nam, and as Vulnerable in India, Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand (Asian Turtle Trade Working Group, 2000). Schoppe and Das (2011) considered that the Vulnerable assessment was due to heavy exploitation for trade. Schoppe (2009) reported that the species was considered the most common freshwater turtle in countries in which the species occurs and Schoppe and Das (2011) reported that C. amboinensis was considered common in most of its range. However, the species was reported to have experienced a rapid decline, demonstrated by its IUCN Red List assessments over time: unlisted in 1994, Lower risk/near Threatened in 1996 to Vulnerable in 2000 (Schoppe and Das, 2011). van Dijk and Rhodin (unpublished data in Schoppe and Das, 2011) were reported to have carried out a preliminary assessment in 2011, which indicated that the species still warranted a Vulnerable status. Schoppe (2008a) reported that no estimates of the global population size of the species were available and that only two population estimates of the species had been carried out, both of which were carried out by TRAFFIC- one in Indonesia and one in Malaysia. Schoppe (2009) reported that C. amboinensis was threatened by over-exploitation, with collection for consumption and traditional Chinese medicine identified as the greatest threats to the species (van Dijk et al., 2000 in Schoppe and Das, 2011). Collection for the pet trade was also reported as a threat (Holloway, 2003 in Schoppe and Das, 2011). The species was reported to have the highest exploitation rate of any hard shelled freshwater turtle species in Asia (Cheung and Dudgeon, 2006) and Bonin et al. (2006) reported that collection pressure was likely to lead to population collapse in the next few decades. Schoppe (2008; 2009) reported that the species was collected across its entire range, including within protected areas, although to a lesser extent, as a result of poor law enforcement. Commercial breeding was only reported to occur on a small scale, outside of the countries of origin of the species (Struijk and Woldring, 2005). Malaysia: C. amboinensis was reported to occur in Peninsular Malaysia as well as the states of Sarawak and Sabah (Jenkins, 1995), including the protected areas of Penang National Park (Ibrahim et al., 2008 in Schoppe and Das, 2011), Loagan Bunut National Park (Das and Jensen, 2006 in Schoppe and Das, 2011) and Gunung Mulu National Park in Sarawak (Das et al., 2008 in Schoppe and Das, 2011). C. amboinensis was assessed as Vulnerable in Malaysia by the IUCN in 2011 (Schoppe and Das, 2011). Schoppe (2008a) reported that the population in Malaysia had reduced and was declining. In 2006 Schoppe (2008a) estimated a density of 0.82 ind/ha in an oil palm plantation in Peninsular Malaysia, which was considered likely to be too low to sustain reproduction and recruitment (Schoppe, 2008a). In Malaysia, people were reported to often capture C. amboinensis in order to release them into ponds at Buddhist temples, believing this to bring good fortune, however, the poor conditions in such ponds were reported to likely prohibit reproduction (Bonin et al., 2006; Sharma, 1999). The meat of C. amboinensis was reported to be consumed in Malaysia, predominately by indigenous groups (Schoppe, 2008a). Schoppe (2009) reported that the species had become more vulnerable to collection as it had adapted to use more accessible man-made habitat such as oil palm plantations as a result of the clearance and drainage of natural habitats. 18