New Tourism Law Puts Tanzania On the Spot Over One-Off Ivory Sale
Charles Kazooba
22 February 2010



Nairobi — The East African parliament has passed a new law that opens space for the region to debate freely whether Tanzania should go ahead with the controversial sale of its ivory stockpile.

The EAC Tourism and Wildlife Management Bill was passed into law at a session of the East African Legislative Assembly held in Kampala, Uganda from February 8-19.

It awaits assent by the Heads of State of the five partner states.

The legislation will establish a Commission made up of professionals who will be responsible for the overall supervision, coordination and management of the tourism and wildlife industries in the region.

Kenya and Rwanda accuse Tanzania of betraying the East African Community's spirit of consultation by pushing for a one-off sale of its 90 tonnes of ivory piled up in storage buildings in the country.

Top on the Commission's agenda is to review Tanzania's reluctance to call off the sale.

"The Commission will advise us on whether the sale of ivory is beneficial to the region and designate hunting areas as well," said Safina Kwekwe Tsungu, Kenya's representative to the EALA and a member of the Committee of Agriculture, Tourism and Natural Resources.

The Assembly's position now leaves room for Tanzania to lobby for the support of other partner states.

But the increased fear of poaching might stand in the way.

According to statistics from the Kenya Wildlife Service for instance, the elephant population in the country dropped from 168,000 in 1969 to 16,000 in 1989, when the ban on ivory trade came into effect - then it slowly began to recover and now stands at 35,000.


Although Uganda is on Tanzania's side, the country is hesitant about a blanket cover that allows East Africa to lift the ban on ivory trade.

"Each country is faced with its unique circumstances. If Tanzania wants to sell its stock, it is free to do so. A blanket cover would, for instance, impact negatively on Uganda's elephant population, which is small," said Serapio Rukundo, Uganda's Minister for Tourism.

At the debate in Kampala which was presided over by Abdirahin Haithar Abdi, some members were of the view that Tanzania's insistence to sell its ivory would deprive the region of valuable tourism potential.

"Why should we want to make a quick buck by killing elephants to sell ivory? We must preserve our heritage," said Gervase Akhaabi, a member of the East African parliament, from Kenya.

quote:

"Why should we want to make a quick buck by killing elephants to sell ivory? We must preserve our heritage," said Gervase Akhaabi, a member of the East African parliament, from Kenya.

Kenya has already killed off most of it's wildlife.............



,

standard a--hole reaction from Kenya, which "wastes" its wildlife, and would prefer to see that ivory burned. That would drive up prices for illegal ivory and benefit only the poachers; since it would make their harvest much more valuable.

Dipsticks!!

Rich

Costs Now the Main Issue in Ivory Debate
Mike Mande
22 February 2010



Nairobi — As the debate rages worldwide over if Tanzania should be allowed to sell its stockpile of ivory, internal attention is now focused on the practical question of costs.

Does it make sense for the country to continue spending $75,000 annually to secure its stockpile of 12,131 tusks - weighing 89,848.74 kilogrammes and estimated to be worth $12 million in the Asian markets?

Protecting the stockpile has raised the cost to $1.5 million over the last 21 years since trade in ivory was banned under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (Cites).

Tanzania and Zambia have asked for a one-off permission to sell their stockpiles in the international markets.

However, if Kenya and other East African Community countries opposed to the application succeed in blocking the request, President Jakaya Kikwete's government fears it will not only be stuck with the possibility of protecting the ivory, but besides, the country will have to spend an addition $2 million to build two strong rooms to store it.

The 15th Cites conference, to be held in Doha, Qatar, in March, 2010, is expected to seal the ultimate fate of the application, made by Tanzania and Zambia for the authority to sell their stockpiles.

With Kenya and its allies seeking a permanent ban on ivory trade, the decision in Doha will determine the value of Tanzania's stockpile.

An affirmative decision will allow Dar es Salaam to recoup the $1.5 million it has spent to protect its stockpile so far, a temporary "No" could leave the country with an expensive decision, and a permanent ban could eliminate a legal market.

A decision short of permission to sell the tusks will likely force the country to make the strategic choice of either hoping that one day the legal market will boom, and the country can fetch a handsome profit for keeping the stockpile, or burning the entire stockpile in, like Kenya did in 1989.

Wrong timing

Tanzania's request comes on the 20th anniversary of the signing of the Cites treaty, and at a wrong time when there is an upsurge in the poaching of elephants due to a booming market for ivory products in Asia.

Killing elephants for tusks is illegal, but selling ivory from animals that have died of natural causes has been permitted on occasions.

This has renewed the debate among conservationists about if allowing limited sales on occasions creates a market demand for ivory sufficient to spark a new wave of poaching.

This is what countries such as the Democratic Republic of Congo and Kenya are fearing.

South Africa was allowed a one-off sale of its ivory stocks in 2007, alongside Botswana, Namibia and Zimbabwe, during the 14th Cites conference in The Hague, Netherlands.

The consignment of 108 tonnes was sold to Japan and China for a reported $20 million.

Tanzania's main stockpile is well secured in a strong room at the wildlife division headquarters, and is provided with permanent surveillance.


Other two smaller stocks of 13.2 tonnes are kept at Arusha National Park and the Ngorongoro conservation Area, under the control of the Tanzania National Parks and Ngorongoro Conservation Area Authority.

A report The EastAfrican had access to shows that the Tanzania government would be required to construct another two strong rooms at $1 million each for storing the tusks if the proposal to sell the 89,848.74 kilogrammes of ivory is turned down by Cites.

The report adds that Tanzania would be able to fetch more than $12 million if Cites allowed for sale the registered tusks and pieces in the Japan and China designated markets, and will not present further proposals to allow trade in elephant tusks from its population for six years after the date of the single sale.

The East African parliament has already passed a law that opens space for the region to debate freely if Tanzania should go ahead with the controversial sale.

Kenya's elephant decline had more to do with underhunting followed by drought, ivory scavengers, and finally Somali ivory poachers working in conjunction with KWS.
Bravo Kenya for continuing to ensure "endangered" populations of everything they have

Zim gets support in ivory sales

By Patrick Chitumba



ZIMBABWE has found support from Russia, Zambia and Tanzania to block Kenya’s proposal to extend the moratorium on ivory trade for the next 20 years and to force members to burn their ivory stockpiles, National Parks and Wildlife Management Authority (NPWMA) board member Mr George Pangeti has said.
As the dates to the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (Cites CoP 15) draws nearer, Kenya has been lobbying its allies to vote for the extension of the ban on ivory trade.
The Cites Conference of Parties (CoP15) meeting will be held in Doha, Qatar, from 13-25 March and Zimbabwe is seeking approval to sell its stocks.
“I am glad to note that we have found support from Russia and other countries who share the same interests with us in terms of sustainable use of resources and conservation. As we go to Qatar, we are going to advocate for the removal of the moratorium so that we dispose off our ivory stockpiles,” he said.
NPWMA director-general Dr Morris Mtsambiwa said Zimbabwe was going to give Kenya and her allies a big fight.
“Other than extending the moratorium, Kenya is also proposing that we burn the ivory stockpiles. Obviously we will not agree to that as we believe that we must utilise ivory for the purposes of supporting conservation.”
Dr Mtsambiwa added that the country believed in consumptive sustainable utilisation of the wild animals considering that their population had grown tremendously over the years.
“As a country, the elephant population is now too much for the natural habitat. We need to hunt the elephants and we need to sell the ivory so that our communities benefit from the animals that are destroying their crops,” he said.
Tanzania and Zambia are also seeking a similar approval to sell government-owned stocks that have accumulated over the years.
Zimbabwe has well over 200 tonnes while Tanzania has nearly 90 tonnes. Zambia has just over 21 tonnes.
Taking the opposite view, unfortunately is the Congo, Ghana, Kenya, Liberia, Mali, Rwanda and Sierra Leone who are proposing a halt to the limited international trade in African elephant ivory currently permitted and a 20-year moratorium on any proposals to relax international trade controls on African elephants.
A long-running global debate over the African elephant has focused on the benefits that income from ivory sales may bring to conservation and to local communities living side by side with these large and potentially dangerous animals versus concerns that such sales may encourage poaching.
Cites banned the international commercial ivory trade in 1989. In 1997 and 2002, recognising that some southern African elephant populations were healthy and well managed, it permitted Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe to sell some stocks of ivory to Japan totalling over 150 tonnes.
The sales took place in 1999 and 2008 and earned some US$20 million for elephant conservation and community development programmes within or adjacent to the elephant ranges.