
African wildlife officials appalled as EU opposes a total ban on ivory trade - adamnemecek
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2016/jul/06/african-wildlife-officials-appalled-as-eu-opposes-a-total-ban-on-ivory-trade
======
adamnemecek
You guys should consider donating to the International Anti-Poaching
Foundation[0][1] which fights these poachers. The founder, Damien Mander[2],
is an Australian ex spec-ops sniper who is using his military experience to
train the park rangers since they, unlike the poachers, tend to be poorly
equipped and trained as well as understaffed.

There is also the David Sheldrick Wildlife Trust[3][4] which takes care of
elephant and rhino orphans (most of them are orphans due to poaching). For $50
a year, you can become a sponsor of a particular orphan and they'll send you
photos and updates about how your sponsored animal is doing. You can for
example sponsor this little fella [5][6]. It's a great gift.

[0] [http://www.iapf.org/](http://www.iapf.org/)

[1] [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Anti-
Poaching_Fou...](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Anti-
Poaching_Fou..).

[2]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damien_Mander](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damien_Mander)

[3]
[http://www.sheldrickwildlifetrust.org](http://www.sheldrickwildlifetrust.org)

[4]
[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Sheldrick_Wildlife_Trust](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Sheldrick_Wildlife_Trust)

[5]
[http://www.sheldrickwildlifetrust.org/asp/orphan_profile.asp...](http://www.sheldrickwildlifetrust.org/asp/orphan_profile.asp?N=318)

[6] [http://instagram.com/p/sigT3IAUKb](http://instagram.com/p/sigT3IAUKb)

P.S. You should subscribe to
[http://reddit.com/r/babyelephantgifs](http://reddit.com/r/babyelephantgifs)
and [http://reddit.com/r/babyrhinogifs](http://reddit.com/r/babyrhinogifs) for
a daily dose of adorable pachyderm content.

~~~
okreallywtf
That first link 404's btw, removing /en/ seems to fix it.

~~~
adamnemecek
Fixed thanks.

~~~
Ophiom
Guess ycombinator is automatically truncating it.

~~~
adamnemecek
It's actually my sloppiness. I copied the link from a comment I made
previously and didn't check it. Fixed now.

------
Millennium
I'm coming to the conclusion that a better long-term solution might be more
along the lines of what Pembient[1] is doing: devise methods to produce ivory
and related materials in the lab, ensure that it is indistinguishable from the
"organic" stuff, and then flood the market into oblivion.

Anti-poaching methods are obviously needed to fill in the gaps while
technology catches up, and should be continued or perhaps even escalated. But
the most effective weapon against poachers could prove to be the very markets
that draw people to poaching in the first place. Remove poaching's feasibility
as a lucrative profession, and the profession dies.

[1]: [http://pembient.com](http://pembient.com)

------
zbjornson
I fully support anti-poaching measures, but what this article doesn't discuss
is the effect of a total ban on trade of existing ivory products. Old musical
instruments (pipe organs, old pianos, some wind instruments) with any ivory in
them (e.g. decorative inlays or the key slips on a 1000+ kg organ) cannot have
their ivory parts repaired and the instrument cannot be sold under a complete
trade ban, which is a shame and a waste. This came up with the US Forestry and
Wildlife Service recently when they also proposed a complete ban. There are a
handful of folks who recover ivory from art/antiques exactly for restoring
other products without resulting in new poaching.

Edit: see this article, which was just updated today, about the effect of
ivory bans on musicians and instruments
[http://americanorchestras.org/advocacy-government/travel-
wit...](http://americanorchestras.org/advocacy-government/travel-with-
instruments/endangered-species-material/ivory-ban-impact-on-orchestras.html)

~~~
phowat
Sure, let's not avoid killing thousands of endangered animals so people can
keep restoring old pianos. Priorities, right ?

~~~
chrischen
The reason Rhinos are being poached is the fact that its illegal to take their
horns. They cannot farm Rhinos for horns so wild Rhinos end up being killed
for it. It is in fact possible to remove Rhino horns safely eithout killing
the animal.

This issue is another perfect example of people thousands of miles away
detached being in an uproar with half assed solutions like "ban ivory" which
exacerbate the problem.

~~~
bronson
Rhinos can't really be farmed. They have awful temperaments and require
massive amounts of land.

(...another perfect example of people thousands of miles away detached being
in an uproar with half assed solutions like "farm rhinos" which exacerbate the
problem...)

~~~
chrischen
According to this VICE article, there are in reality a lot of rhino farms.
They say there are simply more illegal poachers because the trade has been
illegal for so long, and became dominated by criminals. Sort of like
prohibition-era USA.

[http://motherboard.vice.com/read/rhino-horn-crisis-and-
the-d...](http://motherboard.vice.com/read/rhino-horn-crisis-and-the-darknet)

~~~
bronson
You're right, there are a number of white rhino farms. It's the black rhino
that's more farm-resistant. I hadn't realized the distinction, thanks.

With enough money, anything can be farmed... But can that supply enough horn
to solve poaching? (honest question, I can't find an authoritative answer)

------
jbob2000
Just to play devil's advocate; If there was a total ban, then it would go
underground and nobody can really watch what's happening with the ivory trade.
There is already A LOT of ivory out there, it's not like it goes bad or
anything, so you'd be forcing estates to go underground or destroy it if it
weren't regulated.

I think it's a complex situation, not as simple as saying "elephants died,
therefore bad".

~~~
adamnemecek
This is silly. By allowing trade, you are sustaining a market for it.
Furthermore, a legal market would be a cover for the illegal market.

~~~
throwaway420
This is a fantasy. Making ivory trade illegal today in every country in the
world wouldn't suddenly make the demand go away.

It only drives the price up and makes crime and violence more likely as the
rewards are even higher. Take the market for all kinds of drugs as an easy
example. Making it illegal is very short-sighted: it doesn't suddenly make
drugs disappear from society, it just makes it more expensive and this
incentivizes people to crime to protect their drug business. If it was legal,
drug crime would dry up overnight, like it did when Alcohol prohibition ended.
You don't see the brewing company that makes Miller lite take out a hit on
Yuengling Lager nowadays, do you?

If you want to preserve these animals, legal markets for them should be
strongly encouraged. Think of solutions that may be developed as far as
harvesting ivory that wouldn't kill the animals if it was legal. Maybe private
farming that sustains these populations in some way would be developed.
Chickens that lay eggs aren't in danger of going extinct anytime soon because
they're being preserved because they make people money. Just having a market
for a good isn't a bad thing.

Just driving it underground harder and harder encourages poor and desperate
people to risk everything for a massive payday.

~~~
adamnemecek
> It only drives the price up and makes crime and violence more likely as the
> rewards are even higher.

What's the black market price for Kinder Surprise eggs, an item that's illegal
in the US.

Comparing this with drugs is not the same. No one "needs" ivory the same way
they "need" heroin.

> Making it illegal is very short-sighted:

Why is it that poaching skyrockets whenever the restrictions are relaxed?

> Think of solutions that may be developed as far as harvesting ivory that
> wouldn't kill the animals if it was legal.

How does that stop poaching?

> Maybe private farming that sustains these populations in some way would be
> developed.

Do you know much about elephants? Do you know much about elephant husbandry?
Can you talk a bit more about these proposals and the possible problems?

~~~
soyiuz
> What's the black market price for Kinder Surprise eggs, an item that's
> illegal in the US.

Kinder eggs are not a good analogy. The market demand is not really for
"Kinder eggs" it is for "kid's chocolate." The segment has many alternatives.
If all chocolate was banned (or difficult to source as it was in the Soviet
Union) we would indeed see a thriving black market (as it was in SU).

~~~
adamnemecek
Whereas ivory doesn't have alternatives?

~~~
soyiuz
Not in the sense that other metals can be an "alternative" for gold. Brand
name (Kinder) vs. the substance (chocolate).

------
ced
Does anyone have context for the EU opposition to the ban? Economic interests?

~~~
iteabagkevin2
Because black markets for these goods are much more devastating to the animal
populations than a legal regulated marketplace.

~~~
adamnemecek
This is simply not true and this 'meme' is really harmful. A legal market
would only encourage consumption and serve as a cover for the black market.

~~~
SimonPStevens
I would like to see some evidence on either side of this argument.

I can see that there is logic to both cases. Saying one side is "simply not
true" doesn't make your case. Is there any firm evidence either way.

~~~
adamnemecek
Read the comments in this thread. The current crisis is generally attributed
to the 2008 lifting of CITES restrictions that has allowed African countries
to sell their stockpiles to China and Japan.

------
jswny
Correct me if I'm wrong but I can't imagine that the legitimate cases for the
use of ivory/elephant products are economically significant at all to the EU.
Because of this, I'm confused as to why they would be treading so lightly and
avoiding a complete ban.

~~~
jbmorgado
It's not about that of course. It's that the EU feels like just banning
without ivory trade without a support network behind in Africa will just lead
to even more devastating black market ivory trade.

We can see how bad the previous bans went and how the wild life suffers in
those same African countries that already banned poaching... but where the
elephants keep dying awfully because the local governments are corrupt and let
the poaching continue gaining even higher margins after the ban.

It's exactly that the EU wants to avoid.

~~~
adamnemecek
> how the wild life suffers in those same African countries that already
> banned poaching

Which specific countries are you talking about?

------
Qantourisc
Simple solution: if you can't hammer out the details of what you really want
in time, extend the current one.

------
mbroshi
The article mostly describes how elephants populations have been dwindling
with the ban in place. I do not see any statistics supporting the view that
elephant populations will dwindle any more quickly/slowly without a ban.

~~~
pmontra
There have been periods with and without bans. Elephant population decreased
faster when there were no bans.

[http://www.iol.co.za/dailynews/opinion/controversial-call-
fo...](http://www.iol.co.za/dailynews/opinion/controversial-call-for-
unrestricted-commercial-exports-2043369)

"About half the continental population was lost in the decade before the
Appendix I listing in 1989, and a dramatic spike occurred again after a “one-
off” ivory sale in 2008 to China and Japan."

"Cites [Appendix I] saved African elephants from certain extinction 27 years
ago by listing them on Appendix I. It ended the poaching crisis and elephant
populations began to recover, until their protection under Cites was weakened,
causing poaching to escalate again."

~~~
jbmorgado
That piece fails to address that the reason is that the Western nations
stopped financing so much the anti poaching enforcement in african countries.

It was not exactly the lift of the ban, it was that Western nations decided
that the problem was controlled, or that it was time that African nation
started taking care of the poaching problem themselves and cut funding.

------
kentosi
What's so good about ivory? Why can't other non-animal-based materials be
used? I don't see the appeal to go to such great lengths to kill an animal for
its horn/tusks.

~~~
soyiuz
It is a cultural thing. In some countries the horn is ground up and used for
(pseudo)medical purposes.

------
atomicbeanie
So very frustrating. We've done the same thing in this country when Europe had
it together. Can't Africa get a break from our first world bureaucracy's?

------
lumberjack
In other news, the EC is trying all kinds of soaps to wash the grease off
their hands.

------
jpollock
What's stopping ivory farms from being opened in countries with local demand
for ivory?

~~~
dpark
Expense. Raising elephants/rhinos is probably extremely expensive, especially
when you consider how little ivory you get from an elephant raised for, say,
10 years. Poaching is only lucrative because the poachers don't bear the cost
of raising the livestock.

Also if you tried to establish a farm where you raised elephants for ivory,
the moral outrage would almost certainly get you shut down, with an new law if
no existing ones covered it. The "countries with local demand for ivory" are
in general countries that have made ivory trade largely illegal already,
because most of the population agrees it's pretty repugnant.

~~~
giarc
Not to mention that creating a farm for elephants would make a great target
for poachers. No one would take on that risk of raising an elephant for 25
years, only to have a poacher kill it and take the ivory (and all the
elephants value).

------
jdimov10
Just a hint of what the EU is really made of.

~~~
Xorlev
Is it better to surface the trade and regulate it, or push it underground?

~~~
adamnemecek
There isn't a black market for everything. E.g. how big is the black market
for Kinder Surprise eggs in the US? How big is the market for leaded gasoline?

~~~
Xorlev
People don't often decorate their homes and make other items out of leaded
gasoline or kinder surprise eggs. Luxury items are created from ivory.

~~~
adamnemecek
Right. There isn't that big of a market for luxury items.

------
overcast
What the hell is wrong with these people? It's 2016, use your brains you
savages.

~~~
iteabagkevin2
"It's the current year" is not an argument.

------
marcoperaza
It seems that the Europeans are concerned about the black market. The same
reason why the War on Drugs is so ineffective. Banning the market without
effectively controlling supply is a disaster.

~~~
UnoriginalGuy
> ITT: People who understand why the War on Drugs is ineffective but can't
> fathom why pushing all ivory trade into the black market could have similar
> results.

With all due respect, "ITT:" (In This Thread) is hardly constructive. First
off you cannot generalise all of the replies already made, and secondly you
cannot know the direction of future replies or how the conversation will
evolve.

If you want to make a point comparing the ivory trade to the war on drugs,
that's great, it might generate some thoughtful discussion. But this "ITT"
nonsense from Reddit is just that, nonsense.

~~~
marcoperaza
Yeah, you're totally right. Edited.

------
cmdrfred
I see why GB left. Is there any legitimate purpose for ivory besides
aesthetic?

~~~
TazeTSchnitzel
Why do you assume the UK disagrees with this stance? They might have lobbied
for it.

~~~
Guthur
The wider assumption is that the UK will actually leave. The referendum was in
no way binding.

