I am no expert in this matter. But from what I know when you apply for a CITES permit, its for your own use only. Which means you cannot sell your trophy or profit from it. I fail to understand what purpose this serves so long as the animal has been legally hunted and exported and imported in to your country.

Maybe someone can explain the advantage of this rule!

Illogical rules and thinking will bring about the end of the game IMO!

AR

Do you really expect any sense in these matters?

When Western countries have even banned the sale of anything related to CITES animals, regardless of age?

I think the idea is a legal market creates demand and channels that the black market can engage in to hide its illegal trade.

The removal of prohibition did not make moonshine legal or go away, but destigmatized and made prosecutions more difficult. Victim’s Rights group take a similar possession with legalizing sex work. Bring if prostitution were legal, it would make it easier to traffick snd force the vulnerable into sex work.

The bottom like is CITIES does not want any market, so if a CITIES permit holder cannot trade, the market is not expanded.

CITES in the UK for example seem to be very anti hunting and make life as hard as possible for anything.

quote:

When Western countries have even banned the sale of anything related to CITES animals, regardless of age?

Like mammoth ivory. Argument is that you often cannot tell the difference between real ivory and mammoth ivory. What a croc of shizz.

Western countries have gotten THE STUPID VIRUS!

No common sense whatsoever in this regard!

This is all a crock of sh&t. The cocaine trade is illegal. The import/export and hunt bans have only benefitted those in black hats. We all know this.

Why hasn’t anyone come down hard on the end users? The guys on the ground are just looking to make a buck, which may just be a few bucks. The middlemen, the financiers, and end users are a big problem.

Can we get Dr. Fauci to tell the orientals that ivory/rhino horn ain’t viagra?

Folks were harvesting rhino horn without harm to the rhino and stockpiling it in hopes CITIES would authorize a sale.

If CITIES is not going to authorize a no-kill rhino trade, why does anyone think CITIES would allow a trade in ivory that is harvested through killing.

Again, I do not think it can be overstated, C

Let us assume CITIES tomorrow was going to allow a market for 600 pairs of ivory to be harvested for international sale, how would one enforce and policy that? I know CITIES tried to police the sale in some furs.

Neither non kill rhino nor ivory is going to happen. I suspect the reasons are as stated. Assuming, those reasons are accurate, one is free to disagree with the logic.

Why not use all these captive breed lions as they are livestock to meet the demand for lion by-product. The answer, I suspect is the same, black market trade would move too freely behind the legal trade, and a legal market would increase demand.

The call of the question was “why.” That is my insight extrapolated from dealing with Victim’ Rights people concerning the sex industry/trade.

Again, I do not think this can be overstated, CITIES does not want any trade/market in rhino, elephant, lion to exist. They certainly are not going to start one.