Gee! The Kenyan government,whose key backers and supporters and members started out back on "Independence Day" by dealing in the ivory trade and for decades thereafter -now want "protection" of the elephant? Can someone explain to this simple, one time hunter to Africa (Zim,buff)how come there are are so many elephants in Tanzania and Zimbabwe -and so few in Kenya? But I thought elephants lived in a "No Hunting allowed" paradise in Kenya? Oh,well, here's another opportunity to throw dirt on real hunters before a US Congressional "subcommittee" -talk about the blind leading the blind!

maybe obamas brother can do the negotiating

From the article:

quote:

Kenya’s campaign against trade in elephant ivory goes before the US Congress Wednesday as the government solicits support for its proposal for a 20-year moratorium.

It would only affect the legitimate ivory trade. Against the illegal ivory trade, it would obviously have little or no effect.
So who would this benefit really?

Ain't gonna happen..... The US is tired of paying for the current storage costs of Tz's stockpile which runs at approx $75K - $80K p.a.

They want that ivory sold!

`Fingers crossed on ivory sale proposal to CITES`

By The guardian reporter

13th February 2010


The possibility of Tanzania’s proposed sale of its stockpiled 60 tonnes of elephant tusks is now in the hands of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) after its officials visited the country to inspect the stockpiled tusks.

Natural Resources and Tourism minister Shamsa Mwangunga told this paper in a recent interview that CITES officials who did the work for two weeks had left the country to prepare a report that will be presented at the organisation’s meeting scheduled for Doha next month.

The meeting, she said, will determine whether Tanzania should have its 60 tonnes of elephant tusks stockpiles disposed of or not.

During their inspection, the officials were interested in establishing the size of the stockpiles in godowns, legality of how they were obtained and the years in which they were collected, the minister said.

“The officials have completed the screening exercise and they are going to prepare their report from which the final decision will be reached at the Doha meeting in next month,” said Mwangunga.

She said it was at the Doha meeting that Tanzania would most likely get a permit from the organisation to sell the tusks if other members would not object to the proposal.

CITES officials have been in Tanzania for well about two weeks to inspect the 60 tonnes of elephant tusks which have been stockpiled in godowns for about two decades.

“We have good reasons in putting up our request before the organsation and there is a possibility that CITES will give us permit next month. Let us hope that some members will not embark on lobbying to ensure that we are not given a go ahead,” Mwangunga said.

She said the tusks lined up for sale are those collected after the elephants had died naturally or those found after the jumbos were killed as a result of causing threats to human beings.

“We cannot in any way engage in selling tusks that were obtained illegally, including those been seized from poachers and from other country,” she noted.

She said the inspection by CITES officials in Tanzania was a normal exercise by the organisation to every member country whenever it placed a proposal before for sales of endangered species or products from fauna or flora.

At the end of last month, Natural Resources and Tourism deputy minister Ezekiel Maige told this paper that CITES officials were working with Tanzanian wildlife staff on the country’s proposed sale of elephant tusks.

He said despite the fact that Kenya and eight other African countries were lobbying other member countries, including the UK, to vote against the proposed sale of the tusks, Tanzania would remain steadfast on disposal of the stockpiles at the CITES meeting.

Besides Tanzania which is seeking a permit to sell its 60 tonnes of tusks, there is Zambia which wants to sell 22 tonnes.

A report published recently in London’s Independent newspaper said that the second sale of elephant tusks triggered a considerable revival of the illegal trade, with a consequent upsurge in poaching over the past years.

Kenya’s concern is that any further trade would undermine the ability of CITES to properly monitor the effects of the one off trade that was approved at CoP14 and conducted in late 2008, according to the paper.

It has accused both countries of taking advantage of a loophole in a moratorium on ivory trade agreement negotiated in 2008 that seeks a nine year ‘resting period’ on the trade.

CITES, also known as the Washington Convention, is an international agreement between governments, drafted as a result of a resolution adopted in 1973 at a meeting of members of the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN).


SOURCE: THE GUARDIAN

quote:

Originally posted by someoldguy:
From the article:

quote:

Kenya’s campaign against trade in elephant ivory goes before the US Congress Wednesday as the government solicits support for its proposal for a 20-year moratorium.

It would only affect the legitimate ivory trade. Against the illegal ivory trade, it would obviously have little or no effect.
So who would this benefit really?

I don't know. Look how safe the US cities with draconian gun laws are..........

The way the process works is that this could not get before the U.S. Congress without the current administration already in complete support of it and orchestrating the appearance and fully behind it.

The "twenty year" part of the ban will after a short time be termed a "loophole" that must be closed.

I don't think at this point in U.S. history the muscle and votes are still there to get stuff like this stopped. However, that's just an opinion and I hope it's incorrect.