CITES screening Tanzania`s elephant tusks

By The guardian reporter
27th January 2010


Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) officials are in Tanzania, where they are inspecting the 60 tonnes of elephant tusks the country would like to dispose of.

Natural Resources and Tourism deputy minister Ezekiel Maige told this paper in an interview yesterday that the officials were already working with Tanzanian wildlife staff on how the country would sell its elephant tusks, which have been stockpiled in godowns for about two decades.

He said the inspection was a normal exercise undertaken by CITES whenever any of its member countries sends it a proposal on the planned sale of endangered species or products from related fauna or flora.

The deputy minister said Tanzania would maintain its stand on the sale of the stockpiled tusks as per its proposal to CITES “despite the fact that Kenya and eight other African countries have lobbied other member countries, including the UK, to vote against the proposed sale in the CITES meeting slated for Doha in March this year”.

The countries opposed to the proposed sale of 60 tonnes of stockpiled tusks for Tanzania and 22 tonnes for Zambia claim that they fear that, if the two countries have their way, elephants would face more slaughter that would cut their population to well below 1980s levels.

The current twist in the tale comes as reports emerged on Monday that a Kenyan delegation was in Brussels to lobby the European Union to stop Zambia and Tanzania from disposing of their stockpiles of elephant tusks.

Deputy minister Maige told the BBC Swahili Service on Monday that Tanzania had stockpiled tusks for more than 17 years for whose sale it was yet to get CITES permission.

He said Tanzania wants to sell the 60 tonnes “because the cost of ensuring their security is unbearably high and storage facilities are hard to come by”.

“We sent our proposal at CITES simply because we are one of the body’s member. So, Kenya should wait as the CITES secretariat works on the matter,” noted Maige.

Kenya Wildlife Conservation communication officer Paul Udoto has meanwhile been quoted as saying his country, Congo, Ghana, Liberia, Mali, Rwanda and Sierra Leone are among African countries that had refused to buy the sale proposal by Tanzania and Zambia.

He said it was agreed in one of the CITES meetings that at least nine years must elapse before another sale could be made after the two (in 1997 and 2008) by four southern African countries - South Africa, Namibia, Botswana and Zimbabwe).

Conservationists say that sales by the four countries have considerably weakened the ban by reviving a legal market into which illegal and poached tusks can be laundered.

As a neighbour and a member of the East Africa Community (EAC), according to Udoto, Tanzania should have discussed the issue with Kenya “because after all the wild animals belong to both countries as others move to Kenya and vice versa”.

When pressed to explain if Kenya would have supported Tanzania’s proposal if it involved the former country, he said: “It (Kenya) would still stick to its stand though it was important for it to be informed about the decision by Tanzania to auction its ivory stockpiles, due to the good relations the two countries have enjoyed.”

“We find it difficult to agree with the proposal in view of the trends in 1997 whereby 47 tonnes of elephant tusks were illegally sold and in 2008 the figure reached almost 214. If Tanzania was lacking a secure place to keep the tusks it should have asked for assistance from Kenya and I am sure we would not hesitate to keep their stocks. We are worried that the move will contribute to illegal poaching activities if the elephant tusks are sold,” Udoto told BBC.

A report published in London’s Independent newspaper says 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. It added that in several West African countries, such as Senegal, elephant populations are on the verge of extinction.

To the dismay of conservationists, Britain did not oppose the two “one-off” ivory sales, and environmental campaigners feared that it would proceed with the third.

British Environment Secretary Hilary Benn said on Monday that the UK would vote against the proposed sale of stockpiled tusks by Tanzania and Zambia.

After a day in which opposition spokesmen called for an explicit statement on the UK’s position, Benn made it unequivocally clear that Britain would oppose the proposed sale, which is due to be voted on at the next CITES meeting (in Doha).

Benn took a clear stance against the sale, saying: “At the CITES meeting in March, the UK will vote against the proposals from Tanzania and Zambia to sell ivory stocks, and we would urge other countries to vote against such a sale.”

However, he appeared to leave the door open for possible future auctions when he added: “In 2008, CITES members agreed to a single, one-off sale of legal, stockpiled ivory from countries with stable elephant populations. The sale was intended to reduce demand for illegal poached ivory.

The UK will not consider other sales of ivory until the effects of 2008year’s sale have been fully analysed.”

Environmental campaigners fear that this means that Britain will not oppose a second request (at the meeting) from Tanzania and Zambia that their elephant stocks be “downlisted” from the CITES’ Appendix One to Appendix Two, meaning that eventually some trade in elephant products such as ivory can be resumed.

At a news conference in the Belgian capital on Monday, Kenyan Forestry and Wildlife minister Noah Wekesa said: “As elephant poaching reaches heights not seen for decades and the volume of illegal ivory seized soars, the African Elephant Coalition, representing the majority of African elephant range states, is appealing to the European Union to take urgent and immediate action to prevent the further slaughter of elephants across much of the continent.”

“Why, therefore, Tanzania and Zambia chose not to consult with range States, is deeply regretful,” said Wekesa as he addressed a CITES meeting.

Kenya has raised concerns that any further trade would undermine the ability of CITES to properly monitor the effects of the one‐ff trade that was approved at CoP14 and conducted in late 2008.

“This is a very serious problem. Poaching is rampant in many areas, including Tanzania and Zambia. Ivory smuggling is widespread, with more than 20 tonnes intercepted in 2009 alone,” said the minister in a statement issued to the media on Tuesday.

Kenya 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.

The text of the annotation contains a loophole, which means that it applies only to those populations already listed on Appendix II, the minister said.

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).

Its aim is to ensure that international trade in specimens of wild animals and plants does not threaten their survival, and it accords varying degrees of protection to more than 33,000 species of animals and plants.


SOURCE: THE GUARDIAN