Common use of BASIC DATA Clause in Contracts

BASIC DATA. Apply format as outlined above on page 4, limit to maximum 1-2 pages. ● Guidance regarding the definition of Range States in Action Plans and subsequent obligations of AEWA Contracting Parties: Each Contracting Party to AEWA is equally responsible under the Agreement for all the AEWA species/populations they host as per the obligations set out in the AEWA legal text. All the countries which host a specific species (whether in small or large numbers) are considered Range States for that species. The identification of Principle Range States in AEWA Action Plans, is an approach used to prioritise coordinated international conservation efforts to those countries considered to be crucial for ensuring the favourable conservation status of the species/population in question. Various approaches are used in the existing AEWA Action Plans to determine the geographic scope and the Principal Range States which carry the major responsibility for the implementation of the respective plans. Principle Range States are the countries that will be invited to participate in inter-governmental AEWA International Species Working and Expert Groups to coordinate implementation following the adoption of Action Plans and will also be requested to report specifically on progress made on Action Plan implementation. An initial assessment of the Principle Range States for a new species for which an Action Plan is being prepared, is carried out by the Lead Compiler in the very beginning of the action-planning process together with the UNEP/AEWA Secretariat and supported by the Technical Committee, as necessary. It should be noted that, under no circumstances does the identification of Principle Range States in AEWA International Species Action Plans, diminish the legal obligations of potential remaining Range States which are Contracting Parties to AEWA to equally ensure the adequate protection and conservation of the species/populations in question, including through implementation of relevant actions from the respective Species Action Plan. ● Guidance on defining the Action Plan Spatial Scope for Species with a Wide Geographical Range: As recognised by the AEWA Technical Committee, for Action Plans covering species populations with a wide geographic distribution, relatively high numbers and/or different sub-species, a more differentiated approach may be necessary, in order to limit the scope of the plan so that urgent activities for implementation remain focused on the most important Range States. In such Plans, Principal Range States are defined as Range States which regularly support a set percentage (between 1 and 5% of the biogeographic population) breeding and/or non-breeding numbers of the species/subspecies and ideally not exceeding 20 countries. In addition to the Principle Range States, two additional Range State categories are suggested to be introduced to such Action Plans, as necessary:

BASIC DATA. Apply format as outlined above on page 46, limit to maximum 1-2 pages. ● Guidance regarding the definition of Range States in Action Management Plans and subsequent obligations of AEWA Contracting Parties: Each Contracting Party to AEWA is equally responsible under the Agreement for all the AEWA species/populations they host as per the obligations set out in the AEWA legal text. All the countries which host a specific species (whether in small or large numbers) are considered Range States for that species. The identification of Principle Principal Range States in AEWA Action Management Plans, is an approach used to prioritise coordinated international conservation management efforts to those countries considered to be crucial for ensuring the favourable conservation status of the species/population in questionquestion or those countries that experience considerable human-wildlife conflict with the population. Various approaches are used in the existing AEWA Action and Management Plans to determine the geographic scope and the Principal Range States which carry the major responsibility for the implementation of the respective plans. Principle Principal Range States are the countries that will be invited to participate in inter-governmental AEWA International Species Working and Expert Groups to coordinate implementation following the adoption of Action Management Plans and will also be requested to report specifically on progress made on Action Management Plan implementation. An initial assessment of the Principle Principal Range States for a new species for which an Action a Management Plan is being prepared, is carried out by the Lead Compiler in the very beginning of the actionmanagement-planning process together with the UNEP/AEWA Secretariat and supported by the Technical Committee, as necessary. It should be noted that, under no circumstances does the identification of Principle Principal Range States in AEWA International Species Action Management Plans, diminish the legal obligations of potential remaining Range States which are Contracting Parties to AEWA to equally ensure the adequate protection and favourable conservation status of the species/populations in question, including through implementation of relevant actions from the respective Species Action Plan. ● Guidance on defining the Action Management Plan Spatial Scope for Species with a Wide Geographical Range: As recognised by the AEWA Technical Committee, for Action Management Plans covering species populations with a wide geographic distribution, relatively high numbers and/or different sub-species, a more differentiated approach may be necessary, in order to limit the scope of the plan so that urgent activities for implementation remain focused on the most important Range States. In such Plans, Principal Range States are defined as Range States which regularly support a set percentage (between 1 and 5% of the biogeographic population) breeding and/or non-breeding numbers of the species/subspecies and ideally not exceeding 20 countries. In addition to the Principle Principal Range States, two additional Range State categories are suggested to be introduced to such Action Management Plans, as necessary: