Baraza

Dear Friends,

There has been unprecedented flooding in Samburu  in Northern Kenya. This is a report from the ground from the team at Save the Elephants.

“Today we woke up to reports from our guys at the research centre that Samburu is under water! The whole of Samburu is flooded! All our tents have been washed away! Our research camp as we know it is gone! Luckily all our guys are safe but hanging from trees and at hilltops waiting to be rescued by helicopter! Oria’s c…amp – Elephant Watch – has not been spared either! She is currently relocating her wagenis to safer grounds. Iain has flown to Samburu accompanied by Wainaina and Onesmas to assess the damage and take some supplies (ironically the guys up there are dehydrated although they are surrounded by floods!) – water, food, blankets, brollies, name it! Partners, colleagues, and friends have come together to help as much as possible – Lewa is evacuating with helicopters and offering accommodation, Tropic Air is offering water and other supplies, The British Army has stepped in too, and many others. We are still getting updates from Samburu and will post these as they come in… Njoki for STE”

We will continue to post updates as the situation unfolds. As of now the flood waters are apparently receding but all the camps in Samburu and Shaba have been evacuated. Shivani of Ewaso Lions blog is also affected and we look forward to seeing her video of the situation.

Dear friends,

Representatives of the 17-country Coalition for the African Elephant have arrived in Brussels to discuss the ivory trading proposals. They want the European Union, which votes as a block, to say no to Tanzania and Zambia in Doha in March.

“We are asking the European Union to take a clear stance in support of a nine-year moratorium adopted in 2007 by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES),” Kenyan Forest and Fauna Minister Noah Wekesa told journalists.

According to an article in the Guardian, ivory prices have soared from $250 a kilogram in 2004 to more than $6,000 at present. Many scientists believe that this aws the result of stimulation of the chinese market after the November 2008 sale of stockpiled ivory from Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe which was bought by dealers from China and Japan. The sale of 105,000 kilograms of ivory, raised more than £15m, but has led to escalated poaching across Africa. Some scientists estimate that between 8 and 10% of the population is dying annually at the hands of poachers.

The UK has said no to ivory sales. Environment Secretary Hilary Benn said last night: “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.”

Meanwhile Namibia has backed ivory sales saying that the proposals from Zambia and Tanzania are in line with their policies. Never mind that tens of thousands of elephants are dying annually due to poaching which has been catalyzed by the one off sales in November 2008. Traffic International are warning that over 14,000 ivory items were siezed in 2009 compared to just 2,000 the year before.

TRAFFIC was established in 1976 and has developed into a global network, research-driven and action-oriented, committed to delivering innovative and practical conservation solutions based on the latest information. Yet despite all the information on how ivory sales spur the illegal killing of elephants, TRAFFI Boss Richard Thomas says “It is a really worrying situation, However, it is not absolutely clear what should be done.”

In other words, TRAFFIC does not want to influence the CITES delegaets with an opinion even though it is glaringly obvious. What is even sadder is that in 2007 the parties to CITES agreed on a 9 year moratorium on further sales. Apparently a mistake was entered on the agreement (intentionally or unintentionall) that limited the moratorium only to the five countries that were selling ivory. This mistake was not detected until after the vote and though Kenya protested it was too late. Of course what this did, was it created an opportunity for countries that did not sell ivory in 2008 to submit ivory sale proposals this year. We believe that the parties to CITES should honor the intentions of that agreement and reject Zambia and Tanzania, and indeed ask them to withdraw their proposals.

THe Coalition for the AFrican Elephant represent 17countries. Kenyas Miniser for Forestry and and Wildlife, Dr. Noah Wekesa is leading the team.

“We are asking the European Union to take a clear stance in support of a nine-year moratorium adopted in 2007 by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES),” Wekesa told journalists. .

“The EU plays a major role within CITES,” Wekesa insisted. “If it abstains during this vote, it will contribute towards worsening an already critical situation.”

Please support the Coalition for the African Elephant by circulating this email and writing to your CITES authorities to vote no to the ivory trade propsoals

Del.icio.us : CITES, Kenya, TRAFFIC International, Tanzania, elephant, elephant killing, elephants, ivory, ivory trade, poaching, trade
Technorati : CITES, Kenya, TRAFFIC International, Tanzania, elephant, elephant killing, elephants, ivory, ivory trade, poaching, trade
Zooomr : CITES, Kenya, TRAFFIC International, Tanzania, elephant, elephant killing, elephants, ivory, ivory trade, poaching, trade
Flickr : CITES, Kenya, TRAFFIC International, Tanzania, elephant, elephant killing, elephants, ivory, ivory trade, poaching, trade

East African battle on sale of ivory to take centre stage at Brussels forumBy WALTER MENYA, Daily Nation

January 18 2010 at 21:00

The silent wars involving Kenya and Rwanda on one side against their East African partner Tanzania over trade in ivory heads to Brussels from January 22.

Kenya and Mali will be co-chairing a six-day meeting that brings together 27 countries which are members of the Convention on International Trade on Endangered Species (Cites).

They will be aiming at forging a united front against Tanzania and Zambia’s proposal for permission for a one-off sale of ivory.

The meeting in Brussels comes less than two months before the 15th Cites Conference of the Parties (COP15) between March 13 and 25 in Doha, Qatar.

Kenya and Rwanda are accusing Tanzania of betraying the Cites and East African Community spirit of consultation before taking a major step like the one it has proposed. Kenya has also accused Uganda of sitting on the fence when issues of wildlife conservation come up for debate.

Tanzania and its Southern African Development Community (SADC) partner, Zambia, sent a proposal to the COP 15 secretariat on November 17, 2009 seeking “to transfer the population of the African elephant, Loxodonta africana, from Appendix I to Appendix II”.

Appendix I include species threatened with extinction. Trade in these species is permitted only in exceptional circumstances.

Appendix II, on the other hand, includes species not necessarily threatened with extinction, but in which trade must be controlled in order to avoid utilisation incompatible with their survival.

In the proposal, Tanzania is seeking to be allowed to carry out a one-off sale of 90 tonnes of ivory from registered government-owned stocks originating in Tanzania, but excluding seized ivory and stocks of unknown origin, to trading partners that have been already designated by the Cites Standing Committee.

The committee has designated Japan and China because of their domestic trade controls that ensure the ivory is not re-exported. Zambia wants to sell 22 tonnes of its ivory stockpiles.

But Kenya has been joined by six other elephant range states, namely Rwanda, Congo, Ghana, Liberia, Mali and Sierra Leone, to oppose any such sale, arguing that it contravenes the spirit of COP14 that imposed a nine-year moratorium on ivory trade “from the time of the one-off sale by Botswana, Zimbabwe, Namibia and South Africa”, says Mr Patrick Omondi, the senior assistant director and head of species at the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS).

Tanzania and Zambia exploited a loophole in the moratorium that appeared to bar only those who were allowed to conduct a second one-off sale of 108 tonnes of ivory to Japan and China in 2007.

The first experimental sale took place in 1997 during which Zimbabwe, Namibia and South Africa were allowed to dispose off 67 tonnes of ivory to Japan. Also, due to their population, Cites classifies South African elephants under Appendix II.

During 2007 meeting in The Hague, Kenya and Mali’s bid to impose a 20-year moratorium was defeated by the South’s great influence and eventually reduced to nine years with the insistence of the African Elephant Coalition.

The moratorium was meant to develop an African Elephant Action Plan before any proposal to downlist would be accepted. The plan included developing strategies for increasing population and dealing with trans-boundary concerns.

The countdown was to start once the 108 tonnes left the four countries, the resolution stated, and this only took place in November 2009. Thus, Tanzania and Zambia are asking for permission to sell their stockpiles before a year has elapsed.

Kenya has therefore accused the Cites secretariat of open bias for admitting the proposal against the 2007 resolution.

The seven countries responded by also depositing a counter proposal that seeks to extend the moratorium to 20 years.

Mr Willem Wijnstekers is the secretary general of the 175-member Cites, and he is answerable to the United Nations Environmental Programme.

Dismissed

The secretariat has dismissed studies relating legal sale and heightened rate of poaching despite evidence to the contrary. Studies have shown, for instance, that Kenya has seen an increase in poaching, with 47 elephants killed in 2007, 145 in 2008 and 220 in 2009.

Today, Kenya has 35,000 elephants, mainly due to the rigorous protection efforts which include daily helicopter patrols, a real-time communication centre and 24-hour ranger surveillance.

Elephant populations have also deteriorated in Senegal, which now has less than 10, while Liberia, Democratic Republic of Congo and Chad have less than 50 each.

Botswana leads in Africa with 110,000 elephants, followed by Zimbabwe (105,000), Tanzania (91,000), then Kenya.

Tanzania projects its elephant population to be 136,753 in 2006 up from 55,000 in 1989. However, Mr Omondi insists the figure has been exaggerated to convince the world to allow trade in ivory.

“Should Cites approve the sale of Tanzania’s stockpile, the floodgates will open and the African elephant in Tanzania faces a very uncertain future. Tourism will be affected,” states a presentation by Kenya.

Kenya and Tanzania share three national parks that are among the most inhabited by elephants consisting of Mkomazi and Tsavo, Kilimanjaro and Amboseli and Serengeti and Maasai Mara.

And since there is currently no technology to identify Kenyan elephant from a Tanzanian, KWS alleges the ivory listed for sale could actually belong to Kenya. Kenya is in the process of putting collars on its elephants for identification.

Article at the following link:
http://www.nation.co.ke/News/-/1056/845178/-/vpd592/-/
————————————

As the date of the CITES meeting in Doha draws near, Kenyan media is starting to get interested. On Saturday, Cynthia Vukets of Kenya’s NTV reported on the dangerous move Tanzania is making to have it’s elephants downlisted from Appendix I to Appendix II of the CITES Red List of Endangered Species thus allowing them to trade in their 89,848.74 kg of stockpiled ivory to Japan and China. This report, which aired in prime time TV slot (9pm news), also criticizes Zambia’s similar proposal for downlisting. The news item is now available on NTV’s You Tube channel and is embedded here.

Listening to the broadcast, you learn that Sierra Leone lost its entire elephant population to poachers in one day, even though it only had 6 elephants. Six elephants are better than no elephants

Our prayer is that with increased media coverage and more public awareness throughout the world, Delegates to the 15th CITES Conference of Parties (CoP15) will  feel obliged to reject Tanzania and Zambia’s proposals for downlisting of their elephants and vote for a 20-year moratorium on trade in ivory as proposed by Kenya, Congo, Ghana, Liberia, Mali and Sierra Leone.

To understand the epic battle for the elephant that is coming up in 2 months, when African Elephant range states lock horns in Doha, Qatar, to contest for amendments to CITES Appendix I and Appendix II, one must understand what is in the proposals submitted by both sides of the ivory trade divide.

On the one hand is the anti-trade range states consisting of Congo, Ghana, Kenya, Liberia, Mali and Sierra Leone. On the other hand, each with it’s own proposal is Zambia and Tanzania, who want to be allowed to sell their ivory stockpiles come the March 13-25 Doha   meeting – the 15th CITES  Conference of Parties (CoP15). Both sides have sent their proposals to the CITES secretariat and the secretariat has generously (or is it by requirement) posted the proposals on their website. The southern African states of Zimbabwe, Botswana, Namibia and kingpin South Africa are silent in this one. After all, they already sold their stockpiles.

The anti-trade block has renewed the Kenya/Mali proposal made in 2007 for a 20 year moratorium on the trade in ivory, including one-off sales. This moratorium in the language of the proposals is presented as an amendment to both apendices by including an annotation regarding ALL populations of Loxodonta africana, as follows:

“No further proposals concerning trade in African elephant ivory, including proposals to downlist elephant populations from Appendix I to Appendix II, shall be submitted to the Conference of the Parties for the period from CoP14 and ending twenty years from the date of the single sale of ivory that took place in November 2008. Following this twenty year resting period, any elephant proposals shall be dealt with in accordance with Decisions 14.77 and 14.78.”

This change should be accompanied by the deletion of two paragraphs from the last meetings resolutions. One on the elephants of Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe that says:

“h) no further proposals to allow trade in elephant ivory from populations already in Appendix II shall be submitted to the Conference of the Parties for the period from CoP14 and ending nine years from the date of the single sale of ivory that is to take place in accordance with provisions in paragraphs g)i), g) ii), g) iii), g) vi) and g) vii). In addition such further proposals shall be dealt with in accordance with Decisions 14.77 and 14.78.”

and another one concerning the elephants of Namibia and Zimbabwe allowing

f) trade in individually marked and certified ekipas incorporated in finished jewellery for non-commercial purposes for Namibia and ivory carvings for non-commercial purposes for Zimbabwe;

Ekipas are traditional Namibian ivory carvings.

Tanzania which has the second largest population of eleohants in the continent (136,753) has proposed to be allowed to trade its ivory stockpiles by transfer of their elephant population from Appendix I to Appendix II  with an annotation that says:

“for the exclusive purpose of the following:
a)  trade in hunting trophies for non-commercial purposes;
b)  trade in registered raw ivory (whole tusks and pieces) subject to the following

They therefore directly ask for a one off sale of 89,848.74 kg of ivory from registered government-owned stocks, originating in Tanzania (excluding seized ivory and ivory of unknown origin) to registered buyers – which at the last CITES meeting included only Japan and China. They insist that they will not sell the ivory until the CITES Secretariat has verified the stocks and ‘assure’ the secretatriat that “the proceeds of the trade are used exclusively for elephant conservation, community conservation and development programmes within or adjacent to the elephant range in Tanzania”

Tanzania doesnt stop there. In addition to saying that they will not ask for more trade in the next 6 years after their proposed sale (which means they may ask at the end of that period), they also ask to be allowed to trade in raw hide and to sell live animals to “appropriate and acceptable destinations”.

Zambia on the other hand with a population of only 27,000 animals (population smaller than Kenya’s) wants more or less what Tanzania wants: its population moved from Appendix I to Appendix II so that they can trade in hunting trophies for non-commercial purposes, live animals, raw hides and trade in registered raw ivory. For the latter item, the Zambians propose a one-off sale of  21,692.23 kg as ivory from registered government-owned stocks, originating in the country.

So that is the long and short of it. Zambia and Tanzania clamoring for an opportunity to sell a total of 111,540.97 kg of ivory and the Kenya led block gunning for a 20 year moratorium.

According to a report in one of Kenya’s business newspapers, there is a strong likelihood of a fallout between Kenya and Tanzania in light of the two neighbours’ opposing ivory trade proposals sent to CITES ahead of the 15th Conference of Parties (CoP15) to be held in Doha, Quatar this coming March.

While Kenya has submitted a proposal for a total ban on ivory trade, Tanzania “is pushing for a new trading window to allow it to sell its ivory stockpile to fund conservation measures”, said the Business Daily newspaper. Kenyan wildlife officials see this as betrayal by their neighbours with whom they share ecosystems such as Amboseli (Kilimanjaro) and Masai Mara (Serengeti). Kenya believes that Tanzania’s proposal to move their elephants from Appendix I to Appendix II in the CITES rankings, thus allowing them to carry out a one off trade stockpiled ivory, will increase poaching in the named ecosystems.

Tanzania and Zambia are both pushing for an opportunity to sell 89,848 Kilograms and 21,692 kilograms of stockpiled ivory respectively. Zambia also wants to sell raw hides. This is confirmation that CITES ruling that allowed four southern Africa nations (Zimbabwe, Namibia, South Africa and Botswana) after the 14th CITES meeting in 2008 was bound to set a bad precedent.

Allowing Tanzania and Zambia to sell their ivory will signal other African states to ask CITES for permission to sell their legally held ivory stockpiles too. Thus setting the pattern of bad decisions into a spiral. The result will no doubt be a rise in demand and consequently an upsurge in poaching – possibly to the 1970s and 1980s levels that saw the population of elephants in Kenya cut down from 168,000 in 1969 to just 16,000 in 1989.

Kenyan officials have vowed to fight these proposals to the last man. Rallying behind Kenya in the fight to block the Tanzania/Zambia proposal are various African states including Congo, Ghana, Liberia, Mali, Rwanda and Sierra Leone. It would be untold victory for elephants should the pro-trade proposals are voted out and a total ban in all ivory trade is imposed.

So to CITES – and to our Tanzanian neighbours – don’t condemn Africa’s elephants to extinction over a few million dollars worth of ivory.

Dear all,

We are indebted to Scott Ward for this guest post who wrote from Amboseli National Park with spectacular photographs he took there. Scott raises some tough questions. Read more about Scott Ward below.

Photo Scott Ward

As I drove into Amboseli National Park from across the long dry lakebed, I was immediately taken aback by the large number of carcasses that were dotted everywhere.  In some places it seemed as though a bomb went off and destroyed every living creation within a large area.  It seemed as though a great battle took place with no one winning.  Among the dead an inordinate amount of hyenas plundered the dead and decaying.  Of course, to me, the saddest thing was to see the giant decomposing bodies of elephants.  If elephants lived as short of lives as mice, bred like rabbits, and were abundant, I might be able to relegate their death to just a mere cycle of nature.  But I think it is more than that.  When one sees a wild elephant up close and experiences the wisdom of long years in her life and the power within her massive body one quickly realizes that we are sharing our planet with a truly wondrous creation.  The death of one of these magnificent creatures somehow diminishes our Earth.

Amboseli drought photo from http://www.elephanttrust.org

                But in the midst of the macabre dance of the hyena, there is life and green.  Rain has returned to Amboseli – maybe not in the abundance that was hoped for, but arrived nonetheless.  As I drove through the park it was wonderful to see elephants playing in the chest deep water as if celebrating themselves the return of the rains.  Cape buffalo once again have mud to wallow in.  Zebra and wildebeest are slowly returning.  Three beautiful lion cubs were feasting on a freshly caught warthog.  The Rains have returned and hope springs to life again, yet the drought has taken its toll and causes me to wonder what’s next.

Photo Scott Ward

                As I sat around the pool at our lodge, I began to contemplate that probably this swimming pool was filled with water while animals perished just a short distance away.  The freshly manicured grass was definitely kept watered through the long drought, while on the other side of the fence the grass literally dried to dust.  Tourists enjoyed a whole host of drinks and foods while the animals struggled for a drop of water or a morsel of food.  As these thoughts rolled around in my mind, I began to ask myself, “Why can’t we help?”  According to leading scientists, global warming is our fault.  Others say that we should not interfere – that we should take a hands-off approach to wildlife conservation.  Many people just don’t care either way what happens, because they have their own life to worry about.  But they did not see the casualties.

Photo Scott Ward

                I certainly don’t know all the answers, but it did impress upon me the necessity to continue my support of conservation efforts.  The lives of these incredible creatures are too precious to simply let them slide into eternity without a fight.

Scott Ward

 About Scott Ward:   My family and I are missionaries in Northern Tanzania near Moshi.  I am also an amateur photographer trying to take steps into a larger arena with my photography.  I currently have a number of images in the online gallery called Art for Conservation (http://www.artforconservation.org/artists/scottward). It is here that I have been supporting the George Adamson Wildlife Preservation Trust with sales from my photographs on this site.  We live right next to Mkomazi National Park and have visited with Tony and Lucy Fitzjohn who run the conservation effort there. My personal portfolio website is http://www.sbward.com.  I have my sepia-toned images for sale and on display at the web address listed above.  I also have some color photographs of African wildlife at http://useatripod.imagekind.com.

We could be headed back to the ‘dark ages’ of African elephant poaching going by the recent spate of ivory seizures in the continent. Wildlife enthusiasts will remember the horrible days back in the 1980s when the Kenyan elephant population was brought down to its knees by the large scale poaching that was also affecting most of the range states for the African Elephant (Loxodonta africana). Those days may well be back.

A few days ago, the Kenya Wildlife Service seized a large cache of illegal ivory at Nairobi’s Jomo Kenyatta International Airport. Capital FM of Nairobi report in their website that “Police and Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) personnel on Wednesday seized 61 tusks of raw ivory weighing 532 Kilograms (1,172 pounds) at the Jomo Kenyatta International Airport (JKIA).”The large haul is believed to have been headed to Bangkok, Thailand, through Addis Abab, Ethiopia. KWS Director Julius Kipng’etich reports that:

“The unaccompanied luggage was to be air-freighted to Addis Ababa, Ethiopia on the way to Bangkok, Thailand,” he said adding that the ivory had been falsely declared as “POLISHING BENCH” in the Airway Bill and was packed in four boxes.

As luck would have it, the KWS also received reports from Ethiopian Airlines that another larger consignment – 637 kg (1,404 pounds) – of similarly disguised ivory had been intercepted in the capital Addis Ababa two days earlier. “This consignment had also originated from JKIA destined to Bangkok via Addis Ababa by the same consignee,” said Kipng’etich.

The total of 1,169 kg (2,577 pounds) of ivory seized is suspected to be from Kenyan elephants, which would then prove that there is indeed a rise in elephant poaching. According to KWS data, this year, 145 elephants have been killed illegally. This compared to the 47 reported illegally killed elephants in the last two years, is indeed a cause for panic. The rise in number of illegally killed elephants is alarming!

The story of the tough times for elephants doesn’t end at the horn of Africa. On October 1, the same day that the KWS seized ivory in Nairobi, five suspects are reported to have been arraigned in a Harare, Zimbabwe court charged with possession of 30,8 kilograms of ivory worth more than $4 500 (American dollars, not Zimbabwean).

These outlaws had, withing their residence, a high caliber rifle used to kill elephants – .303! The Harare court remanded them out of custody, so they’ll be staying in their residence, probably shoot a few more elephants with another .303 rifle then go back to court on the appointed date for the hearing of the current case.

In Central Africa Republic, the French news agency, AFP, reports that “Police detained two major ivory traffickers in the Central African Republic as a part of a joint operation with animal rights activists”. So the cancer is spreading. According to the AFP, this is the first arrest of this kind in this central African state since they instituted a law against wildlife trade in some 30 years ago. This lot of thugs are said to have their own large stash of illegal ivory.

One of the suspects had 157 ivory objects weighing more than 200 kilogrammes (440 pounds). Unfortunately, these crooks will only get 1-year jail terms each should they be found guilty, which is a ridiculously soft punishment for someone who is probably responsible for the death of tens of elephants, if not hundreds.

Experts say some 38,000 African elephants are killed each year for their tusks. Most believe that the upsurge in poaching in recent months is due to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Flora and Fauna (CITES) decision to allow the southern African states of Botswana, Namibia, South Africa and Zimbabwe(!) to sell their ivory stockpile to the highest bidder in China and Japan. It is believed this prompted a spike in the illegal market for ivory, which, needless to say, is responsible for the upsurge in poaching.

I personally blame CITES for the mess that is ivory poaching. It is difficult and expensive to trace the origin of ivory, especially after it has been worked. What logic did they use to agree to the one-off auction of ivory?

Unless the illegal trade in ivory is completely stumped out, nobody should sell an ounce (or a milligram) of this item. In my opinion, there should not be any ivory trade at all, whether it is properly controlled or not.

Besides, what do humans need ivory for? If humans truly needed ivory, then God (or evolution) would have equipped them with a fine long pair each.

This is a fun survey – please take a moment and give us your  thoughts on this survey

Oh, and forward the link to your friends, through email, Facebook, Twitter, myspace… have I left anything out?

Thanks !

On Tuesday last week, Kenyan authorities seized a 300kg haul of elephant tusks and rhino horn hidden in coffins at the Jomo Kenyatta International Airport (JKIA). This large haul, valued at approximately $ 1-million, is thought to have either come from Tanzania or South Africa and was headed for Laos. Officials of the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS) however speculate that the load’s final destination was indeed China, but through Laos, the de-facto ‘gateway to China’.

A previous haul of illegal ivory as reported on Baraza in April 2009

The KWS has been complaining about increasing ivory poaching since the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) allowed a one-off sale of ivory from southern Africa to China and Japan.  The entry of China into the world trade in ivory was in itself a cause for alarm amongst many conservationists on account of what is viewed as China’s laissez-faire attitude towards wildlife – except the giant panda.  There have been reports from the KWS and other organizations in Kenya and elsewhere in Africa indicating that there is definitely a rise in poaching for ivory and rhino horn.

According to the KWS, the rise in ivory poaching is partly caused by the CITES declaration to allow minimal trade from southern Africa. They say that this declaration created the illusion that it was OK to trade in ivory. If the number of seizures of ivory being witnessed today is anything to go by, then the KWS are right: the CITES declaration is indeed responsible for this mess.

It’s not just elephant poaching that is a problem. Just the previous week, a report was made public that indicates that rhino poaching has reached a 15 year high. The International Union for the Conservation of Nature, IUCN, and the global conservation organization WWF, and their affiliated wildlife trade monitoring network, TRAFFIC, told a CITES committee in a recent meeting that poachers in Africa and Asia are killing as many as two to three animals a week in some areas to meet a growing demand for the horns. What is more worrying is that this poaching is no longer a subsistence activity but it has now evolved into organized crime similar to cocaine and small arms rackets.

Elephants and rhinos are in a very dire situation as this new wave of wanton decimation of the majestic creatures picks up pace. We are witnessing the inevitable extinction of – in the case of the rhino – an evolutionary relic that generations upon generations of humans have marveled at; and the total loss of – in the case of the elephant – the gentle intelligent giant that has been the centre of almost all mythology.

Sentimental values aside, these are ‘keystone’ species that shape the environment that they occur in. Keeping a balance in the ecology of their habitat, and therefore determining the biological diversity of these habitats. The looming departure of these two could permanently alter ecosystems – in the most part – for the worst.

Poaching can do that, and this is going to happen in our lifetime.

A solution has to be found. We first have to stop lying to ourselves that there can be any sustainable trade in elephant ivory and rhino horn. We have seen this with our own eyes. It’s never going to happen. Having realized that, governments should tighten the noose on illegal traffic routes, cut down the poachers on sight, and increase punishment for poaching offenders. China and it’s Asian friends will need to be re-educated.

Dr Richard Leakey, while he was the head of KWS, led an elephant anti-poaching campaign back in the mid-1980s which brought down a large number of poaching rings. It has been 20 years since the symbolic burning of  12 tonnes of ivory – then worth about $3 million and from approximately 2000 dead elephants – at the height of the campaign. Today, elephant population that had dropped from 167, 000 in 1973 to a paltry 16,000 in 1989, now stand at 32,ooo. These numbers could easily start falling if nothing is done about the recent upsurge in poaching. Current wildlife officials could learn from this and step up the fight against poachers on the local level, while all conservationists push for the total ban on trade in ivory and rhino horn.

The symbolic ivory burning in 1989

Again, China and the Asian world that still believes that rhino horn has medicinal value, and carvings from elephant ivory  are ‘cute’, needs re-education.