Day 7: Ivory Trade Approved: "African Elephant Is Less Safe Than It Was a Day Ago"

Delegates to the 12th Conference of the Parties (COP12) to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) took three steps backward in elephant conservation on Tuesday: Committee I approved three separate proposals to open a conditional trade in stockpiled ivory, a resumption of trade that wildlife advocates say will lead to more elephant poaching.

The U.S. delegation shocked CITES Parties by voting for two of the proposals, a position that reversed the United States's long-time, unconditional support for an ivory trade ban. Animal protectionists expressed outrage at the U.S. stance, and about the delegates's dismissal of evidence that a resumption of an ivory trade will kill more elephants.

While the elephant proposals took center stage on Tuesday, Committee I delegates also met late into the night to consider many other species proposals, including ones on blue-headed macaws and whale sharks. Meanwhile in Committee II, delegates considered measures to address illegal trade in a number of high-profile Appendix I species.

The Ivory Proposals: 60 Tons Approved for Trade

The elephant proposals were dealt with in a flurry of secret ballots. Botswana's amended proposal (the country had originally wanted to export worked ivory and secure an annual ivory export quota) to export 20 metric tons of stockpiled African elephant ivory was approved by a mere two-vote margin with 59 in favor, 26 against, and 21 abstentions. (A two-thirds majority is necessary to pass a species proposal.) The approved proposal also allows Botswana to export hides, leather goods and sport-hunted trophies for non-commercial purposes, and live animals for in-situ conservation programs.

Namibia and South Africa's amended proposals to export stockpiled ivory were also approved with similar wording on hides, leather goods, trophies, and live animals. If approved at the plenary meeting, Namibia will be allowed to export 10 metric tons of stockpiled ivory, and South Africa will be allowed to export three times that amount, or 30 metric tons. Both Namibia and South Africa had initially requested annual export quotas—Namibia also wanted to export worked ivory—but that language was removed by amendment.

Like Botswana's proposal, Namibia's was approved by a narrow margin—only three votes—with 65 in favor, 28 against, and 22 abstentions. South Africa's proposal won by five votes, with 65 in favor, 24 against, and 25 abstentions.

Because the wins were rather narrow, it's possible the proposals will be brought up for a re-vote in plenary sessions on Thursday and Friday. If the proposals are approved in plenary, Botswana, Namibia, and South Africa will be allowed to export a combined total of 60 metric tons of ivory after May 2004—if a set of conditions are met to the satisfaction of the CITES Standing Committee.

In a manner reminiscent of the 1999 experimental export of ivory to Japan, the CITES Secretariat will oversee the exports—to a country or countries that have not yet been named. A South African official told the press that Japan will probably buy its entire stockpile.

In contrast, Zimbabwe and Zambia's proposals to export ivory were soundly defeated. Zimbabwe's received 60 votes in favor, 45 votes against, and 10 abstentions. Zambia's proposal received 57 votes in favor, 54 votes against, seven abstentions, and one ruined ballot.

"Clearly, the current political turmoil in Zimbabwe, and associated elephant poaching, had an effect on the delegates," said Dr. Teresa Telecky, director of the Wildlife Trade Program for The Humane Society of the United States. "In the case of Zambia, delegates were obviously swayed by a report from the CITES Panel of Experts, which visited the country and found that Zambia had failed in its elephant management and trade controls in nearly every regard."

"The African elephant is less safe than it was a day ago."

Since Committee I approved three of the five ivory trade proposals, Kenya and India had little choice but to withdraw their proposal to uplist all Appendix II elephant populations to Appendix I, in an attempt to ban the trade in ivory. Delegates from both countries again noted their fears that the export of stockpiled ivory would have a devastating impact on African and Asian elephant populations.

"We are going to start seeing elephants getting killed," said A.O. Bashir, a member of the Kenyan CITES delegation. "We are not exaggerating. You will see it. And not only elephants, but you are going to lose lives of rangers, of poachers.

"It is a very sad day not only for Kenya, but for most of the African range states, which actually have a very weak enforcement capacity," Bashir continued. "There is nothing in place to ensure that the illegal trade will not take place. We have seen this before when Zimbabwe was given a 'one-off' like what has happened now. We should be prepared now to spend more money and to lose more lives in terms of poachers as well as rangers doing this job."

Hagos Yohannes, the head of the delegation from Eritrea, which has just 28 elephants left, said, "One thing I am quite sure of is that we have sent a message around the world that the African elephant is less safe than it was a day ago." The U.S. Vote

After the elephant votes had been taken, the United States, in the interest of transparency, announced that it had voted for the proposals of Namibia and South Africa, but against the others (which confused observers, since the United States had voiced support for Botswana's proposal the day before). This reversed the United States's long-standing, unconditional opposition to the international ivory trade, a position it has held since at least 1989.

Judge Craig Manson, the head of U.S. delegation, said, "If the conditions are met, we believe [the ivory trade] would be consistent with sustainable management of the species."

Back in the United States, U.S. Representative George Miller (D-CA), a leading voice on the environment and conservation in Congress, quickly responded to the new U.S. position on the ivory trade: "The Bush Administration's support for renewed trade in elephant ivory in Namibia and South Africa is a grave disappointment and a disaster for international conservation efforts. Even though the Republican Party mascot is an elephant, their ivory trade policy will lead to increased elephant killing in many African countries."

"The United States has behaved deplorably on the ivory trade issue," said The HSUS's Telecky. "They should know from past experience that the conditions under which they have agreed that ivory may be exported will be rubber-stamped by the CITES Standing Committee, just like in 1999. "We have seen that the 1999 export coincided with increased illegal ivory trade," Telecky added. "What more proof does the United States need that ivory trade undermines elephant conservation?"

Birds

Committee I returned to Switzerland's proposal, originally taken up last week, to exempt from CITES controls the international trade in color morphs of eight types of parrots and parakeets produced by captive breeding. The proposal was defeated with 21 in favor and 31 against.

Committee I then began to consider the remaining species proposals, starting with birds. Costa Rica's proposal to transfer the yellow-naped parrot from Appendix II to Appendix I was accepted by consensus, as were Mexico's proposal regarding the yellow-headed parrot and the European Union's proposal to transfer the blue-headed macaw to Appendix I. South Africa withdrew its proposal to transfer the Cape parrot from Appendix II to Appendix I.

Reptiles and Whale Sharks

Next, Committee I approved by consensus the listing on Appendix II of a large number of Asian turtle species, including Asian pond and forest turtles, roofed turtles, the big-headed turtle, the Annam pond turtle, the yellow-headed temple turtle, the Sulawesi forest turtle, the yellow pond turtle, the Malayan giant turtle, the keeled box turtle, the black marsh turtle, the narrow-headed softshell turtle, and the giant softshell turtle. New Zealand's proposal to include two types of gecko on Appendix II was defeated by a vote of 30 in favor, 59 against, and 26 abstentions. The U.S. proposal to delete the orange-throated whiptail lizard from Appendix II was approved.

The Philippine's proposal to list the whale shark (whose populations are dwindling because of over-fishing) on Appendix II was defeated under secret ballot by a narrow, two-vote margin of 62 in favor, 34 against, and nine abstentions. Given the narrow margin, it's likely that this proposal will be brought up for a re-vote in plenary.

Committee II

In addition to the CITES budget and implementation issues, Committee II discussed documents relating to the illegal trade in Appendix I-listed bears (used in traditional Chinese medicine), leopards, snow leopards, clouded leopards, tigers, and Tibetan antelope. It planned to revisit the issues on Wednesday. The CITES Secretariat withdrew its controversial proposal to repeal an existing resolution on rhinoceros conservation, and the committee approved new recommendations on the trade in musk deer.