Ivory trade regulator points to gaps in southern African states’ application to reopen ivory sales
Ivory trade regulator points to gaps in southern African states’
application to reopen ivory sales
Farayi Machamire for Zim Morning Post, MSN
November 14, 2022
But CITES, the UN Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species
of Flora and Fauna, remains unconvinced by the submissions the four
elephant range states have made, and fear that lifting restrictions on
ivory trade would open the floodgates to poaching.
A final decision on the proposal, and 51 other proposals made to CITES by
other member states who are part of 184 signatory Parties, will be made in
November at the Nineteenth Conference of the Parties meeting (CoP19) which
is CITES’ ultimate decision-making forum.
Leading up to that convention, the CITES Secretariat has left a small
window open for concerned parties and interested stakeholders to provide
further submissions on any of the 52 proposals currently under debate.
The four states, on their part, have threatened to pull out of CITES, if
their concerns are not upheld.
They regard CITES as an inhibitor and not an enabler of progress towards
the continued protection of large African elephant populations, and that
CITES decisions remove rather than create incentives for conservation.
Elephant populations of Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe
comprise around 256,000 elephants or 61.6% of all remaining elephants in
Africa.
In its recently published assessment of the countries’ proposal, CITES
noted the uneasy relationship but still held that not enough information
and evidence had been provided for the proposal to have a fighting chance.
“The proposal is to remove some of the special measures currently in place
concerning the trade in ivory…However, the supporting statement does not
provide information on what special measures would replace these or what
effective enforcement controls are in place associated with these
measures,” CITES Secretariat said in their provisional assessment.
“The proponents do not discuss findings by the Elephant Trade Information
System (ETIS) relating to the levels and trends in illegal trade in ivory
in detail. It is acknowledged that the demand for ivory, particularly in
Asia, has been linked to poaching in areas where law enforcement is neither
strong nor effective,” CITES Secretariat continued.
“As mentioned above, the proponents do not specifically address
precautionary safeguards concerning the trade in registered raw ivory but
propose to retain the main restrictions in the annotation to the Appendix
II listing adopted at CoP14.
“Considering the recent closure of domestic markets in Asia and elsewhere,
it is not clear which country (or countries) might be a possible trading
partner.
“It would be helpful to understand how any future trade in registered
government-owned raw ivory would be conducted, regulated and enforced, if
the proposal is adopted. This would allow the Conference of the Parties to
determine whether the precautionary measures are adequate to address the
anticipated risks to the species.”
The four countries insist that the sale of legally sourced, registered
ivory to responsible markets could generate revenue to fund implementation
of national elephant management plans and anti-poaching strategies, as well
as supporting community-based initiatives to secure elephant habitat,
dispersal areas and corridors.
The Secretariat provisionally concluded that it is unclear to the
Secretariat whether the precautionary safeguards have been fully addressed.
“If adopted, the proposed amendments would have the effect of reducing the
quantity of registered government-owned raw ivory of L. africana from the
populations of Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe deemed to be
specimens of species of Appendix I. The potential risks of increased
poaching or illegal trade in ivory associated with a legal trade in
registered government-owned raw ivory stocks, or measures to address these
risks, are not elaborated upon,” CITES said.
“The proponents propose to retain the main restrictions in the annotation
to the Appendix-II listing adopted at CoP14, but it remains unclear how any
future trade in registered government-owned raw ivory would be conducted,
regulated and enforced, if the proposal were adopted.”
The provisional assessment will be followed in early October by the
Secretariat’s final assessment of the proposals.
The final assessment will consider comments from Parties and other bodies,
which are consulted as they have a particular interest or expertise in the
subject of the proposal.
SADC states have presented similar proposals in the past and they have been
rejected by the Conference of the Parties.