STOP Ivory Trade

Introduction | Websites & Email Addresses | Background Information | Arguments - Pros/Cons

STOP IVORY TRADE - DON’T LIFT THE BAN!

Email your opinion today to U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services, Convention on Trade in Endangered Species, Your State and Federal Legislator, Your Business Contacts, Your Friends

submit comments online

Background Information

The Elephant
Conservation and management of the African elephant is undoubtedly a very complex issue, which encompasses a wide range of implications on local communities, tourism industries, national economies and our world heritage. We totally agree that wildlife conservation cannot succeed without looking at it in the local context, but that is not the objective of this particular appeal. The Elephant is known to all mankind and is in a class of their own. Weighing 3-6 ton, up to 13 feet height at shoulder, and tusks weighing an average of 60 lbs, elephants are gregarious, forming small groups composed of master bull, a few immature bulls, female and calves. Elephants have elaborate behavior patterns and are sociable mammals. The gestation period is 22-24 months, puberty at 10-12 years, reach maturity at 18 years, and can have a life span of 60-70 years or more. Sound familiar?

Elephant Slaughter in the 1980's
In 1989 following the slaughter of an estimated 700,000 elephants in 10 years, a reduction of 50% from 1.3 million to 600,000, a proposal was placed before the 117 delegations at CITES calling for an international ban on the trade in ivory and other elephant products.

Previous CITES Ban

On basis of this incredible killing of an average of 8 elephants an hour (70 000/year) poached during this period, the 7th Conference of the Parties to CITES approved a worldwide ivory trade ban in September 1989. The CITES ((Washington) Convention of International Trade In Endangered Species) regarded the species as threatened and they were included in appendix 1.

Within a matter of months, the bottom fell out of the ivory market. These who had argued that the illegal trade would flourish and prices rise were proven wrong. The price of ivory, which before the ban had been as high as $300 a kilo, fell to between $10 and $20. The message to the poachers was clear. It was no longer worth risking life to kill elephant for the sake of a few dollars. Customs officials were free to act with certainty knowing that all ivory was illegal. Two of the world's largest ivory consumer markets, Europe and the USA, were effectively closed down.

Lobby to resume Ivory Trade

	Unfortunately, the largest ivory consumer market, Japan, although abiding by the ban and despite having a massive stockpile of ivory to satisfy internal demand (reported at about 300 tons), remained interested in recommencing the trade in ivory.
	Certain countries with large elephant numbers, remained highly critical of the ban, claiming that it was taking away their ability to raise revenue from the their wildlife resource and hence the opportunity to reinvest in wildlife conservation.
	Efforts to re-establish the ivory trade at the CITES meetings in Kyoto (Japan 1992) and Fort Lauderdale (USA 1994) were unsuccessful.
	However during the 1997 meeting in Harare (Zimbabwe) that opportunity presented itself. Zimbabwe, Namibia and Botswana made proposals to the 145 member countries to CITES in which they claimed that, under a number of criteria, they should be permitted to start a limited 'experimental' trade. These criteria included:

Growing elephant populations in the three countries

Lack of significant poaching in the three countries and low levels of poaching in other elephant Range States.

Sound elephant management policies.

The availability of a single willing recipient for the ivory - Japan.

On this basis they asserted that the proposed trade would be controlled, incorruptible and would not stimulate poaching in other countries.

The Harare conference was undecided but delegates to the CITES meeting wavered and the elephant populations in Zimbabwe, Botswana, and Namibia were down-listed to appendix II. This means that limited trade with ivory on quota to Japan is permitted.

A small working party was established to look at contingency plans if trade was approved. The group recommended that a monitoring process should be established to see just how many elephants were being poached across the African Continent and if the data proved that poaching significantly increased following a resumption of trade then a 'mechanism' should be established to allow for the re-up listing of the down-listed elephant populations from Appendix II to Appendix I.

Background of CITES

The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, referred to below as CITES or the Convention, is an international treaty designed to control and regulate international trade in certain animal and plant species that are now or potentially may be threatened with extinction. These species are listed in Appendices to CITES, copies of which are available from the Office of Management Authority or the Office of Scientific Authority at the above addresses, from our World Wide Website http://international.fws.gov, or from the official CITES Secretariat Website at http://www.cites.org/CITES/eng/index.shtml. Currently, 148 countries, including the United States, are Parties to CITES. CITES calls for biennial meetings of the Conference of the Parties, which review issues pertaining to CITES implementation, make provisions enabling the CITES Secretariat in Switzerland to carry out its functions, consider amendments to the list of species in Appendices I and II, consider reports presented by the Secretariat, and make recommendations for the improved effectiveness of CITES. Any country that is a Party to CITES may propose and vote on amendments to Appendices I and II (species proposals), resolutions, decisions, discussion papers, and agenda items for consideration by the Conference of the Parties. Accredited nongovernmental organizations may participate in the meeting as approved observers, and may speak during sessions, but may not vote or submit proposals.

U. S. Government Position on The Ban in Trade of Ivory - background

1) Several U. S Government agencies will form the delegation but the majority of the delegates will be drawn from The U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service which is a part of the United States Government and has its headquarter office at the Department of the Interior building on 1849 C Street NW, Washington DC 20240 Telephone (202) 208-3100

2) The delegation has a list of "Proposed U.S. Negotiating Positions for Agenda Items and Species Proposals Submitted by Foreign Governments and the CITES Secretariat" which can be viewed at their website http://www.fws.gov.

3) For most of the positions, the U.S. is undecided. There is also a massive agenda which does not help. The Fish and Wildlife Services have stated that they will incorporate the views of the American public before deciding on a negotiating position. You can help by contacting them immediately. Please do so.

4) The U.S Gov is undecided on the proposals by the Southern African countries: South Africa, Namibia, Zimbabwe and Botswana have all presented separate proposals to transfer their populations of Loxodonta africana (African elephant) from Appendix I to II, which will allow them to trade in elephant ivory : Prop. 11.20 (S Africa), Prop. 11.21 (Botswana), Prop. 11.22 (Namibia) and Prop. 11.23 (Zimbabwe).

5) The U.S. Government is undecided on the Prop. 11.24. which is to Transfer to Appendix I all populations of Loxodonta africana (African elephant) currently listed in Appendix II. Submitted by India and Kenya. IMPORTANT: Your support is required to have the U.S. government support this Proposal 11.24

Descriptions of the Proposed Resolutions (relevant sections have been extracted from the Fish and Wildlife website). In the discussion that follows below, we have included a brief description of each proposed resolution, agenda item, or species proposal submitted by other countries or the CITES Secretariat, followed by a brief explanation of the proposed U.S. negotiating position for that item. Before COP11, we will announce any changes to the proposed negotiating positions contained in this notice and any undecided negotiating positions by posting a notice on our Internet website (http://international.fws.gov/global/cites.html). However, new information that may become available at COP11 could lead to modifications of these positions. The U.S. delegation will fully disclose any and all position changes and the explanations for those changes through daily public briefings at COP11.

A) Agenda Item # 31. Conservation of and trade in elephants

1. Experimental trade in raw ivory of populations in Appendix II [Doc. 11.31.1]
When we completed this notice, we still had not received the document for this agenda item from the Secretariat. When we receive the document from the Secretariat, the United States will evaluate it and develop a negotiating position.

2. Monitoring of illegal trade and illegal killing [Doc. 11.31.2]
When we completed this notice, we still had not received the document for this agenda item from the Secretariat. When we receive the document from the Secretariat, the United States will evaluate it and develop a negotiating position.

3. Revision of Resolution Conf. 10.10 [Doc. 11.31.3]
The document for consideration was submitted by Kenya and India. The document emphasizes a need to revise Resolution Conf. 10.10 due to apparent inconsistencies in the requirements of Resolution Conf 10.10 as they related to Decision 10.1. ***The United States is undecided on whether it will support the proposed resolution from Kenya and India. The United States is continuing to evaluate this issue, and develop a policy position on this proposed resolution.

4. Non-commercial disposal of ivory stockpiles [Doc. 11.31.4]
The document was submitted by Kenya. The document emphasizes the need to revise the process for the noncommercial disposal of ivory stockpiles that was established under the terms of Decision 10.2. ***We are undecided on whether the United State will support this proposed resolution, and we will continue to consider it and gather relevant information in order to develop a negotiating position.

B) Proposals

Prop. 11.20. Transfer the South African population of Loxodonta africana (African elephant) from Appendix I to II, with annotations for trade. Submitted by South Africa. ***Proposed U.S. position: Undecided.

South Africa has proposed the transfer to Appendix II of its population of elephants, allowing for: (1) trade in raw ivory under a quota of 30 tons of whole tusks of government-owned stock originating from Kruger National Park; (2) trade in live animals for reintroduction purposes; (3) trade in hides and leather goods; and (4) trade in hunting trophies for noncommercial purposes. ***The United States is continuing to evaluate this proposal, in the context of all species proposals relevant to the African elephant (11.20-11.25), and other relevant documents (Documents 11.26, 11.31.1, 11.31.2, 11.31.3, and 11.31.4). These issues are very complex, particularly since this proposal requests an annotation that allows for commercial ivory trade. When we completed this notice, we still had not received all of the relevant documents to be evaluated at COP11 dealing with ivory trade, and the United States is continuing to evaluate the impact of decisions and proposals adopted at COP10.

Prop. 11.21. Maintain the Botswana population of Loxodonta Africana (African elephant) in Appendix II, with annotations for trade. Submitted by Botswana. ***Proposed U.S. position: Undecided.

Botswana's population was transferred to Appendix II at COP10, with an annotation that, among other aspects, allowed for a one-time sale of ivory stocks to Japan. Botswana has proposed to amend that annotation to allow for commercial trade in government-owned stocks of ivory to ACITES-approved trading partners who will not re-export and subject to an annual quota of 12 tons (12,000 kg) of ivory. ***The United States is continuing to evaluate this proposal, in the context of all proposals relevant to the African elephant (11.20-11.25), and other relevant documents (Documents 11.26, 11.31.1, 11.31.2, 11.31.3, and 11.31.4). These issues are very complex, particularly since this proposal requests increased commercial ivory trade. When we completed this notice, we still had not received all of the relevant documents to be evaluated at COP11 dealing with ivory trade, and the United States is continuing to evaluate the impact of decisions and proposals adopted at COP10.

Prop. 11.22. Maintain the Namibia population of Loxodonta africana (African elephant) in Appendix II, with annotations for trade. Submitted by Namibia. ***Proposed U.S. position: Undecided.

Namibia's population was transferred to Appendix II at COP10, with an annotation that, among other aspects, allowed for a one-time sale of ivory stocks to Japan. Namibia has proposed to amend that annotation to allow for commercial trade in government-owned registered stocks of raw ivory (whole tusks and pieces), to trading partners that have been verified by the CITES Secretariat to have sufficient national legislation and domestic trade controls to ensure that ivory imported from Namibia will not be re-exported and will be managed according to all requirements of Resolution Conf. 10.10 concerning domestic manufacturing and trade, with an annual quota of 2,000 kg ivory. ***The United States is continuing to evaluate this proposal, in the context of all species proposals relevant to the African elephant (11.20-11.25), and other relevant documents (Documents 11.26, 11.31.1, 11.31.2, 11.31.3, and 11.31.4). These issues are very complex, particularly since this proposal requests increased commercial ivory trade. When we completed this notice, we still had not received all of the relevant documents to be evaluated at COP11 dealing with ivory trade, and the United States is continuing to evaluate the impact of decisions and proposals adopted at COP10.

Prop. 11.23. Maintain the Zimbabwe population of Loxodonta africana (African elephant) in Appendix II, with annotations for trade. Submitted by Zimbabwe. ***Proposed U.S. position: Undecided.

Zimbabwe's population was transferred to Appendix II at COP10, with an annotation that, among other aspects, allowed for a one-time sale of ivory stocks to Japan. Zimbabwe has proposed to amend that annotation to allow for commercial trade in stocks of raw ivory (whole tusks and pieces), to trading partners with adequate controls and enforcement measures, with an annual quota of 10,000 kg ivory. ***The United States is continuing to evaluate this proposal, in the context of all species proposals relevant to the African elephant (11.20-11.25), and other relevant documents (Documents 11.26, 11.31.1, 11.31.2, 11.31.3, and 11.31.4). These issues are very complex, particularly since this proposal requests increased commercial ivory trade. When we completed this notice, we still had not received all of the relevant documents to be evaluated at COP11 dealing with ivory trade, and the United States is continuing to evaluate the impact of decisions and proposals adopted at COP10.

Prop. 11.24. Transfer to Appendix I all populations of Loxodonta africana (African elephant) currently listed in Appendix II. Submitted by India and Kenya.

****Proposed U.S. position: Undecided****

The United States is continuing to evaluate this proposal, in the context of all species proposals relevant to the African elephant (11.20-11.25), and other relevant documents (Documents 11.26, 11.31.1, 11.31.2, 11.31.3, and 11.31.4). When we completed this notice, we still had not received all of the relevant documents to be evaluated at COP11 dealing with ivory trade, and the United States is continuing to evaluate the impact of decisions and proposals adopted at COP10.

Prop. 11.25. Amend the annotation concerning Appendix II populations of Loxodonta africana (African elephant), regarding the destination of live animals. Submitted by Switzerland. Proposed U.S. position: Undecided.

The United States is continuing to evaluate this proposal, in the context of all proposals relevant to the African elephant (11.20-11.25), and relevant documents (Documents 11.26, 11.31.1, 11.31.2, 11.31.3, and 11.31.4). The United States believes that this proposal should be considered together with Document 11.26, submitted by Kenya, and also dealing with the conditions of live animals in trade under an annotation that specifies that commercial trade is allowed to suitable and acceptable destinations. The United States also supports Doc. 11.24, Use of Annotations in the Appendices, which was drafted and adopted as a consensus document of the Standing Committee (see discussion, above). That document recommends that the Parties not include live animals in these annotations. The United States believes that the meeting of the COP must evaluate and discuss and decide on this issue, prior to discussion of either this proposal or Doc. 11.26. The United States believes that when a species is transferred from Appendix I to Appendix II with substantive annotations, commercial trade in live animals that requires findings on the part of the importing country or determinations of conditions in the importing country should not be included in the annotation.

26. Definition of the term appropriate and acceptable destinations [Doc. 11.26] This draft resolution was submitted by Kenya and addresses concerns that have resulted from annotations applied to the down listing of the southern white rhinoceros in South Africa and African elephant populations in Botswana, Namibia, and Zimbabwe to Appendix II. Under these annotations, international trade in live animals was allowed to "appropriate and acceptable destinations." However, the annotations included no guidelines on how to determine if a destination was "appropriate and acceptable" and gave no indication of whether the exporting or importing country was responsible for making such a determination, or if the animals could be subsequently re-exported. This draft resolution provides a definition of "appropriate and acceptable destinations" as those where the animals will be humanely treated, free to exhibit normal behavior, and able to contribute to the conservation of their species in the wild, with priority being given to other range states. Only export would be allowed, not re-export, and the Management Authority of the exporting country would be responsible for determining that the terms of the annotation had been met. The draft resolution also includes guidelines to assist the Management Authority of the exporting country in making that determination.

The United States agrees that the wording of these annotations is unclear and believes an effort toward clarifying when a destination is "appropriate and acceptable" is needed. While generally supportive, the United States is concerned about some aspects of the draft resolution and continues to evaluate it.

Proposal # 11.24. This is the one which can give hope for the wild elephant populations Transfer to Appendix I all populations of Loxodonta africana (African elephant) currently listed in Appendix II. Submitted by India and Kenya.

Email the international division of the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Services r9osa@fws.gov.