Yay! Striped hyena has been uplisted to Appendix II at this year's CITES CoP20. NABU had been campaigning for a higher protection status - photo: RealityImages - stock.adobe.com
CITES COP20: A big win for the striped hyena
International wildlife trade is now more tightly regulated
The rare striped hyena attracts the wrong kind of attention: body parts such as skin and fur are traded illegally and used in traditional medicine. The fate of the striped hyena is just one example – and it illustrates a broader truth: the global extinction crisis can only be halted if wild animal and plant species are better protected from illegal trade. This is what CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) stands for.
CITES COP20 – the 20th meeting of the Conference of the Parties – took place from 24 November to 5 December in Samarkand, Uzbekistan. More than 180 Parties had voting rights, and their decisions shaped the outcomes of over 50 proposals concerning threatened species. Together with other NGOs, NABU submitted demands to strengthen species protection and followed the negotiations on site as part of the NGO community.
+++ Striped hyena drama with a happy end +++
Negotiations in Samarkand concluded: Better protection for an underdog
5 December 2025 - From now on the striped hyena will receive stronger protection: at the CITES conference in Uzbekistan, the rare species was added to Appendix II of the CITES agreement. International trade will still be possible, but it will be more strictly regulated. This is a major success for the fewer than 10,000 striped hyenas still living in the wild and will offer the species better safeguards from exploitation.
The species missed out on an Appendix-I listing by just six votes – a result made even more disappointing by the “no” votes from the EU, despite the striped hyena not occurring in any EU Member State. Nevertheless, CITES CoP20 provides momentum for completely preventing international commercial trade in the skin, bones and other body parts of the striped hyena in the future.
There was also positive news from Uzbekistan for African elephants and the saiga antelope. A loosening of ivory trade rules was averted. In addition, Kazakhstan’s remarkable success in protecting the saiga was acknowledged: the CITES Parties agreed on important steps to reduce human–wildlife conflict and strengthen public acceptance of the species. Despite these positive outcomes, there was one major downside: at CITES CoP20, an opportunity was missed for the European eel and other eel species. Stronger protection would have been essential here.
The conference outcomes are encouraging but also a wake-up call for stronger species protection – something we continue to promote internationally together with our partners.
Our demands at CITES COP20 in Uzbekistan
At CoP20, we advocated for effective CITES protection status for these four species: the striped hyena, the African elephant, the saiga antelope and the European eel.
-
-
At CITES, we supported Kazakhstan's proposal to relax the ban on international trade in saigas - photo: Botafago-dentro
-
CITES COP20 was a chance to uplist all eel species to Appendix II. But even more needs to be done: European eels should be given stricter protection – photo: Rostislav – stock.adobe.com
-
We rejected any loosening of trade in ivory, elephant products and live elephants at CITES CoP20 - photo: michelle / stock.adobe.com
Better protection for the striped hyenas!
Compared to sharks and elephants, striped hyenas (Hyaena hyaena) were something like the underdogs of the CITES negotiations.
A striped hyena eye to eye with a camera trap in Tajikistan: It was recently rediscovered - photo: TNF
But the negotiations marked a turning point for the often overlooked, rare striped hyena. This species, which is almost extinct in Tajikistan, stood to benefit significantly from this year’s CITES discussions. NABU worked together with its partner TNF in Uzbekistan to support Tajikistan’s proposal to uplist the species from Appendix III to Appendix I at CoP20.
The pre-CoP20 listing provided only limited, country-specific protection, which could not effectively mitigate illegal trade because global import and export regulations remained limited and too weak.
Since the proposal to uplist the species to Appendix I narrowly failed at the end of November, we then focused on securing an Appendix-II uplisting at the CITES plenary. And with success: together with our partner TNF and many experts on striped hyenas, we persuaded all Parties to approve the higher protection status. The CITES agreement now provides stronger safeguards for this threatened species against exploitation.
The immeasurable emotional and ecological cost of species extinction demands action – especially when a “lost” species like the striped hyena in Tajikistan is rediscovered.
Director of NABU’s Tajik partner TNF
Background information on the striped hyena and our demand
Striped hyenas may be less popular than sharks or elephants and seem somewhat mysterious – after all, their nocturnal and elusive behaviour means people rarely encounter them. Yet the striped hyena plays a crucial ecological role by providing ecosystem services such as preventing the spreading of diseases across its range in North and East Africa and Central Asia. The species has also returned to Tajikistan.
The problem: wildlife trade poses a major threat to the rare striped hyena. They are hunted, and body parts such as skin, bones and organs are traded for traditional medicine and used as aphrodisiacs. Individuals, especially cubs, are also captured from the wild and sold as exotic pets on online platforms.
Protecting elephants, stopping the ivory trade
Elephants are living icons of Africa’s savannas and forests. At the same time, they symbolise the devastating consequences of the illegal international wildlife trade.
African elephant - photo: David Kariuki
Namibia’s proposal (No. 13) was negotiated at CoP20 in Uzbekistan: it sought to re-legalise international commercial trade in ivory for the country. This would have allowed international trade in ivory from Namibia’s stockpiles. The approach had been categorically rejected by the majority of elephant range states – including Kenya, one of NABU’s project countries, and India. NABU also firmly opposed Namibia’s proposal. The risk was simply too high that reopening legal channels would increase demand, intensify poaching and fuel the illegal ivory trade.
Proposal No. 13 – and with it any attempt to loosen ivory trade restrictions for Namibia – was rejected by an overwhelming majority at CITES CoP20. The global ban on the commercial ivory trade therefore remains in place. This is a positive outcome for species conservation, demonstrating that effective elephant protection is incompatible with relaxing ivory trade rules.
In addition, Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe (proposal No. 14) had requested, among other things, permission for the commercial international trade in elephant leather for all four countries – including Zimbabwe. Under the previous rules (annotation), Zimbabwe had been excluded from the commercial leather trade. NABU opposed this proposal as well. Such a relaxation of trade restrictions would have heightened demand for elephant products and thereby increased poaching and illegal trade. Experience shows that global trade bans, accompanied by protection measures with local partners and communities, help reduce poaching and support the recovery of elephant populations.
Proposal No. 14 was adopted at CITES CoP20, but in a modified form. All references to ivory exports and ivory stockpiles were removed, preventing the four countries from advancing any relaxation of ivory trade rules. However, regulations allowing the export of elephant skin, leather goods and other elephant products under certain conditions remain unchanged – meaning that the risk of commercial trade being reopened persists. NABU will continue to oppose any such developments.
Background information on the elephant and our demand
Elephants, more than almost any other species, symbolise the fatal consequences of the international illegal wildlife trade. Since the mid-1960s, populations of African savanna elephants have declined by around 60 per cent and are now listed as Vulnerable on the IUCN Red List. The situation is even more dramatic for African forest elephants: their numbers have fallen by more than 80 per cent in recent decades. Today, forest elephants are classified as Critically Endangered.
In Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe, the elephant populations are larger than in many countries where they are found: Specifically, some elephant populations in southern Africa have grown mainly thanks to strict conservation measures in the country, but not because of the ivory trade. Nevertheless, for good reason, the international commercial trade in ivory remains prohibited for these countries.
Scientific studies show that even strictly controlled ivory sales stimulate global demand overall. The efforts to relax trade regulations for ivory and other elephant products under CITES, which have been observed for many decades, are problematic: allowing trade in individual regions leads to regulatory uncertainty, increases poaching and endangers elephants everywhere. The CITES lists must reflect the risk to the entire species.
What the CITES signatory states say
The illegal ivory trade and the poaching associated with it remain among the main drivers of elephant decline. For almost two decades, CITES Parties and the majority of African elephant range states have therefore repeatedly rejected proposals to reopen the international ivory trade.
At the same time, consumer markets such as China, Europe and the United States have either banned or severely restricted ivory sales. At CITES CoP20, however, one country was once again putting these rules to the test. We opposed any relaxation of trade in ivory, as well as elephant products and live elephants at CITES COP20—and will continue to do so.
Saiga antelope: continuing Kazakhstan’s success
The recovery of the once nearly extinct saiga antelope (Saiga tatarica) is a true conservation success story.
Saiga antelope herd in the Ural region - photo: T. Dieterich
At CITES CoP20, NABU supported Kazakhstan’s proposal to relax the existing international ban on trade – but only for Kazakhstan. This would have permitted Kazakhstan to conduct trade under strictly defined conditions.
Partly accepted: the vast majority of Parties voted in favour of Kazakhstan’s proposal and a partial relaxation of trade restrictions at CITES CoP20. This recognised the years of conservation efforts for saiga antelopes in Kazakhstan, including those supported by NABU. The population now stands a better chance of achieving long-term stability. However, the amended decision text failed to take sufficient account of local communities: there is still no mechanism to ensure that local people benefit financially. Market mechanisms were also given too little consideration. This remains an area that urgently needs to be addressed in the coming years.
Wasn’t NABU’s support for easing the trade ban the wrong approach to begin with, you may ask? No – and for good reasons. Long-term species conservation requires acknowledging the enormous population increase – from a few tens of thousands in the early 2000s to around 4 million today – and its consequences for people and nature. Lifting the trade ban for Kazakhstan would have generated revenue, reduced human–wildlife conflict and built much-needed acceptance among land users. In the long run, the saiga antelope would clearly benefit from such a pathway.
In the Ural steppe, we have seen herds of up to 100,000 saiga antelopes. When such herds spend days or weeks on hay meadows, the winter fodder needed by livestock is at risk. Farmers are therefore demanding that saigas be culled. If they were instead able to benefit financially from the presence of saigas, they would be willing to tolerate them on their land.
expert from NABU partner organisation CINEST
Background information on the saiga antelope and our demand
Since the mid-2000s, Kazakhstan – supported by international partners such as NABU – has invested heavily in species conservation. Today, around 4 million saiga antelopes roam Kazakhstan’s steppes. Populations in Mongolia and Russia are also starting to recover.
At present, the saiga antelope is listed in CITES Appendix II. In addition, since 2019, international commercial trade in wild-caught saigas and their derivatives has been banned across all range states – without exception. But this does not reflect the current population dynamics in Kazakhstan.
What drives human-wildlife conflict around the saiga
As saigas migrate in very large herds, and as more areas in their range are being used for grazing or agriculture, conflicts with land users are increasing. When herds of tens of thousands gather on the land of individual farmers, acceptance declines – while calls for population reduction grow louder.
In the worst case, this sentiment could lead to mass culling, renewed tolerance of poaching, and a resurgence of illegal horn trade. This scenario must be avoided. Sustainable hunting under conservative quotas and robust monitoring is possible. If the saiga antelope is to have a future, we must work in close partnership with communities in Kazakhstan and other range states. Only then will they continue to protect the species from poaching and illegal trade.
NABU's position
An introduction of strictly controlled legal trade would:
- continue to provide political and economic support for saiga protection
- provide financial compensation and other mechanisms for land users
- strengthen public acceptance of saigas
- reduce illegal trade – and therefore poaching – by offering a sufficient, legal and certified supply of horns
It is crucial that Kazakhstan sets conservative harvest quotas and avoids excessive hunting of males. Horns should be collected from natural mortality. Cross-border trade controls must be ensured. Revenues must benefit local communities in saiga habitats and support conservation measures.
All for eels: Protecting the European eel!
The European eel is a long-distance traveller. However, it faces many dangers on its long journeys. The European eel is critically endangered, partly due to illegal trade.
Uplisting all eel species to Appendix II: a missed opportunity at this year's CoP20 - photo: Sven Koschinski
NABU supported the proposal submitted by the European Union, Honduras and Panama to include all eel species in CITES Appendix II. Greater transparency in the international trade in eel species would also have benefited the European eel. At the same time, this proposal could only have been a starting point.
However, a major opportunity was missed at CoP20 in Uzbekistan. Only a quarter of Parties supported the proposal to include all eel species in Appendix II, resulting in its rejection. Improved trade controls and binding import and export permits would have been important steps towards curbing the exploitation of eel populations. This outcome is disappointing: the EU must now make eel conservation a clear priority.
Given the dramatic conservation status, NABU continues to call for the uplisting of the European eel to Appendix I. It is also the responsibility of the EU to introduce a ban on catching and trading eels within the EU, as recommended by the International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES). Only then can the critically endangered European eel be effectively protected.
Background information on the European eel and our demand
The European eel is a long-distance traveller: over 10,000 kilometres over the course of its life. Yet across its range – from Europe’s coastal and inland waters to its long migration from Europe to the western Atlantic – the species faces severe danger. Since the 1980s, European eel numbers have declined by more than 90 per cent: the species is now critically endangered.
One of the main threats is the illegal trade in glass eels – the only a few centimetres long juvenile stage. Glass eels are considered a delicacy and fetch high market prices. But even legal catches used for restocking programmes within the EU put additional pressure on the species. And thousands of rivers are obstructed by weirs, sluices and hydropower plants, further limiting the eel’s ability to migrate.
Since 2009, the European eel has been listed in CITES Appendix II. And in 2010, the EU adopted a trade ban for exports of the species to countries outside the EU – an important initial step, but far from sufficient. To ensure the survival of the European eel and prevent further declines, CITES Parties must now rethink their approach and go all in for eel conservation.
NABU's position
Listing all eel species in Appendix II would be an important step towards better protection of the Anguilla genus. But to save the European eel, more is needed – specifically an Appendix-I uplisting:
- Listing all eel species in Appendix II would restrict international trade in eels overall and lead to stricter controls.
- Increased attention and transparency through the Appendix-II listing would also strengthen protection for the European eel: illegal glass eel trade could be detected more easily.
- A ban on commercial trade resulting from uplisting the European eel to Appendix I – combined with a complete ban on fishing – is long overdue.
What does the CITES agreement do for species conservation?
The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) has regulated international trade in wild animal and plant species since 1975. CITES is one of the most important and effective instruments in international species protection. For example, it enables sanctions when individual Parties violate trade restrictions.
What the CITES Appendices mean for species protection
Appendix I – the highest level of protection
Appendix I lists species that are threatened with extinction. Commercial trade in these species is prohibited. This category includes, for example, the snow leopard. Appendix I lists the fewest species.
Appendix II – sustainable use
Species that are not yet threatened with extinction but are at risk from uncontrolled trade are listed under Appendix II. The aim is to ensure sustainable use. Trade in Appendix-II species requires export and import permits, which are based on sustainability assessments (Non-Detriment Findings). The majority (over 50 per cent) of CITES-listed species fall into this category.
Appendix III – protection at national level
Appendix III includes species that individual Parties protect within their national territory. Export from the country of origin is regulated. Cooperation between Parties is crucial for this mechanism to work. Currently, the striped hyena is listed under Appendix III, following a proposal by Pakistan.
Our conservation work
Better than its rep: the striped hyena
In Tajikistan, the striped hyena was long believed to be extinct – until its rediscovery by conservationists. NABU and the Zoological Society for the Conservation of Species and Populations have launched a conservation project to preserve this rare species. more →
Return of the saiga antelope
Saiga antelopes are part of the steppe, just as bison are part of the prairie. Yet this rare animal only survives in five areas in Asia. NABU is helping to preserve the saiga in Kazakhstan with projects for community-based conservation and environmental education. more →
