Should the ivory trade ban be lifted?

Select the link below to watch the Talking Point debate with Willem Wijnstekers, Secretary General of Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (Cites).

  56k modems

Five southern African countries are calling for a lifting of the international ban on ivory sales ahead of a meeting of the United Nations agency that polices trade in endangered species.

South Africa, Zambia, Namibia, Botswana and Zimbabwe have each submitted proposals to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (Cites) to relax international protection for the once-endangered African elephant.

The ivory ban was imposed by Cites in 1989 after a wave of poaching across Africa which saw elephant numbers fall from an estimated 1.3 million to a few hundred thousand.

With elephant populations now rising rapidly in some countries, proponents of relaxing the ban argue that the income will benefit local communities and conservation programmes.

There are 54 other proposals to amend the list of species subject to trade prohibitions or controls to be discussed when Cites' 158 member governments meet in Chile in November.

Japan has also made a request to Cites to resume trade in whale meat from Minke and Bryde's whales, to allow it to buy Norway's surplus meat.

Should the ban on ivory sales be lifted? Should poor countries be more free to harvest wildlife resources to help generate income and jobs?

We discussed the international trade in endangered species with the Secretary General of Cites, Willem Wijnstekers, on our global interactive phone-in programme broadcast online, on the BBC World Service and on Digital television in the UK.

---

This Talking Point has now closed. Read a selection of your comments below.

Maybe this is a choice for Africans to make, but to suggest that relaxing the ban will put money in the pockets of the poor is hopelessly naive. Colombian farmers aren't exactly rich, and the cocaine industry is much bigger than ivory will ever be. The solution to Africa's problems lies with an end to wars, not the sale of a few tons of ivory.
James Davey, UK

All of the anger over killing these creatures is forgotten

V. Lee, London, UK

Why is it that a few years ago, there would be uproar if a wild animal was killed for its skin or its tusks but now it seems to be trendy to be cruel? Fur is back on the catwalks and in the shops and all the anger over killing these creatures is all forgotten. And now it appears that ivory is back on the agenda. I understand culling may be necessary but that doesn't mean that we should encourage people to sell these objects again, especially after all the hard work of conservationists and animal charities to stop this absurd trade.
V. Lee, London, UK

As a Maasai, it is natural that I should be a strong advocate for the complete ban on trade in ivory and other elephant products. However, the continued decline in our elephant populations and degraded gene pool due to poaching fuelled by consumer demands in foreign markets ought to be a matter of concern to all humanity. I am testimony to slaughter of many elephants in our rangelands and unless we stop this greed-driven trade, humankind stands indicted of moral irresponsibility toward nature.
Meitamei Ole Dapash, Maasai Environmental Resource Coalition, East Africa Kenya

What I find disturbing is the number of people who self-righteously sit in judgement on issues which they know little or nothing about. The people who are calling for the lifting of the ivory ban are the conservationists - the same people who called for the ban in the first place, who have worked tirelessly for decades to bring elephants and other species back from the brink of extinction, and having waged a war against poachers. But these people obviously know less than some people on the other side of the world, who have probably never seen an elephant outside a zoo.
Peter H, Bristol, UK

I may be writing this from a city in the north of England, but I understand that there is more at stake here than offending the sensibilities of a few folks in the west. I recall hearing reports that the increased numbers of elephants in regions of Africa has resulted in their raiding and destroying the local farms in search of food. If an official and humane programme of culling is not instigated soon then people will start to take things into their own hands.
Mat Lindsay, Sheffield, England

Regarding those who oppose culling as a matter of principle, there is an option - birth control. By selective process, bull elephants should be castrated, in the same way as stallions are, if for different reasons.
Terry Jones, UK/Thailand

Why don't Western governments only buy ivory directly from governments?

Mark Holden, Amsterdam Netherlands

Why don't Western governments only buy ivory directly from governments? This ivory would then be stored as part of the buying government's wealth [like gold], and not be sold at all by the private sector. There would be no cash in the transactions, so little opportunity for corruption. Money could only go directly into a country's national budget.
Mark Holden, Amsterdam Netherlands

Just what we need: more barbaric trade in the name of human development. Let's put our money where our mouths are and pay them not to do it. It's just money, we can always get more of that, but once everything has been exploited to extinction all the money in the world won't bring back what is lost.
Zak Albion, Leicestershire England

We humans are consuming more than any other species. We are eating almost every kind of animal depending on our geographical positioning of the world. Let us make use of the land, not the habitants!
Abdirizak Sharif Idris, Nashville, Tennessee, USA

The conservation programmes have had an incredible success, and I trust with the commitment that has been shown by these governments in the past, we can be assured that the trade will be well regulated.
Suresh Gnasegarah, Selangor, Malaysia

A fair ivory ban would involve mandatory aid to Africa

Nick, Portland, US

Consider the economics of the current ban. The US and EU benefit most and Africans pay for the ban because it is their labourers who are left idle. How do we have the nerve to ask such charity of such a poor continent? The ivory trade should be banned, but the cost should be allocated in proportion to the benefits. A fair ivory ban would involve mandatory aid to Africa equal to what they would otherwise get from the ivory trade.
Nick, Portland, US

We are searching for a temporary treatment of the African situation; why are we not looking for an end to the cause? No problem would exist if it were not for human overpopulation. What's to happen when the ivory is gone and the population has doubled in size? Birth control should be distributed. Stop the source, not the outcome.
Aniko Lane, Albuquerque, USA

Why not license a specific number of elephants to be culled and track the total quantity of licensed ivory? It seems to be an all or nothing proposition. We can ban its import into our countries without an accompanying certification of license. If the Africans want to destroy their animals for short-term gain it is their business, but we should not fund the act and should vigorously prosecute its import and resale.
George Milton, USA and Italy

The eco-system is unbalanced

Lebonyeng Marole, Semolale, Botswana/ USA

The ivory ban was imposed when the elephant population was threatened. Now we African countries are facing a major, elephant overpopulation. The eco-system is unbalanced. Elephants destroy their own habitat when feeding and at the end the whole wildlife species suffers. We can't farm because if we do hungry elephants destroy our crops, hence we go hungry. I would say trade controls are great but they have to take into account that we need just enough animals to fit in the land allocated not overpopulate the areas.
Lebonyeng Marole, Semolale, Botswana (student in USA)

Most African countries with elephants fear that allowing legalised ivory trade will simply encourage poaching. If legal ivory trade is resumed how will the Secretariat minimise smuggling of ivory which is currently going on at very high levels?
Will Travers, Born Free Foundation, UK

The world has clearly demonstrated that it is unable to effectively police the trade in drugs and people. How therefore can it manage and monitor a controlled selling of ivory by some countries? Some of which have also shown themselves to be corrupt and only interested in wars such as that in the DRC so as to plunder mineral reserves. Such countries would love the ban to be lifted, it would expand their sources for obtaining funds, that would never find their way into conservation.
SH, Nairobi, Kenya

Once people realise how lucrative the ivory trade can be, poachers will surely return

Gord, Nairobi, Kenya

Lifting the ban would be economically rewarding. But the fear is that once people realise how lucrative the ivory trade can be, poachers will surely return. I think we need to put in place strong regulatory commissions on ivory trade across Africa (southern and eastern especially) before the ban can be lifted.
Gord, Nairobi, Kenya

It is an African issue, to be determined by Africans for Africans. Everybody else stay out of it, and to all you conservationists, send all of your money to Africa to feed the people who would have reaped the rewards of the ban being lifted in the event it doesn't happen.
Anon, US

I believe that if the developed world put in as much effort as it is putting in animal rights into the current economic problems in Africa, then we would be on our way to solving a very serious imbalance.
Asaju Lee Tunde, Abuja, Nigeria

If you permit ivory trading then poaching occurs; if you ban it then ivory from legally killed elephants (eg rogue elephants) must be destroyed. We are between a rock and a hard place. Licensing leads to fraud and forgery, and how would the consumer know whether his trinket came from a legitimate source? Anything that can be made can be faked, and will be faked if there is enough profit in it. The only practical solution (harsh though it is) is to keep the complete and total ban on trading ivory.
Craig Goodwin, UK

This is what they have to do to survive in their environment

Marc Rudlin, California, USA

Countries like the US and Britain didn't get to where they are today by being environmentally aware. We had to do what we had to do to survive and prosper. Canadians hunted animals for the pelt trade. Should we persecute them? No. It is wrong for us to look down upon African nations from our advanced perspective. This is what they have to do to survive in their environment.
Marc Rudlin, California, USA

I love listening to sententious Europeans espouse their beliefs on matters that should concern only Africans. Europeans exploited our continent for centuries, plundering our resources at will. And now, despite the fact that Europe still comprises the largest market for such goods, they insist that we not supply it in order to feed ourselves. Eliminate the demand for such goods on your own continent first, and then we will deal with the suppliers. It's European hypocrisy in its purest expression!
Celestine, USA/ Formerly Nigeria

In certain wildlife parks in South Africa eg the Kruger National Park, there is not enough land to sustain large numbers of elephants. The park authorities have to cull them since it's not economically viable to remove the animals to other parks. If the sales ban were lifted, the ivory of these animals could then be sold to help finance new parks/more land or removal programs. This is the issue, not the poaching of the animals which should remain illegal.
Frank Cobain, South Africa

No, lifting the ban will surely worsen the situation for the beautiful creatures. If the population is the problem can't those elephants be gifted/moved to different countries who would surely love them?
Satish Kumar, Chennia, India

The important point most critics are missing about elephants in the apparent danger of a population crush. In one area, in Botswana, there are 120,000 elephants in an ecological area with capacity to hold not more than a 50,000 herd. The use of emotive language eg "butchering" and "killing beautiful creatures" will not help the elephants. They will be saved by sound management and conservation policies and programs which the applicant countries have put in place.
Pula Kenosi, Tokyo, Japan

Culling already occurs legally in a number of countries to safeguard human population and the environment. I can't see the problem with allowing trade in ivory, strictly controlled of course, under these conditions.
James, UK

Regardless of whether the ivory trade is allowed or not, poaching should remain illegal. If culling for tusks is to be allowed, it should be done only in accordance with an effective conservation-based park management plan by persons specifically authorised by the respective park authorities to do the culling.
Michael Canaris, Sydney, Australia

Whatever your take on the ethics of harvesting ivory, the fact remains that it is a valuable resource and it is not surprising that poor African countries want to take advantage. If it can be done in a sustainable way, then the harvesting of natural resources is perhaps our best chance of protecting Africa's wildlife.
Alex, London, England

Our own lives depend on a balanced eco-system

Tricia Williams, Orlando, USA

I cannot believe they would even consider lifting the ban. We as humans need to protect all creatures. Our own lives depend on a balanced eco-system. Not to mention it's absurd to consider killing an animal for a tacky ornament.
Tricia Williams, Orlando, USA

Elephant numbers in southern Africa need urgently reduction. Yet the reliance on money from ivory makes African wildlife agencies too scared of misguided international opinion to undertake culling. They should give ivory away to stop the illegal trade and international criticism of profiteering, and restart population management programmes.
Bruce Davison, Laramie, USA

Of course this cannot really be considered on conservationist grounds. However ivory is one of the most easily exploitable resources these African nations have. Perhaps investment from abroad in another venture may end this desire to start up the ivory trade again. Perhaps this is the plan of the African nations?
Nick, UK

It should be extended forever

Liz, UK

What a ridiculous thing to suggest. Ivory serves no purpose apart from decorative (and only then in some opinions), and the only way to obtain it is to slaughter the elephants. There is absolutely NO need to lift a ban, indeed, it should be extended forever.
Liz, Berkshire

The income may benefit local communities and conservation programmes, but aren't there other ways this can be achieved? I agree entirely with Liz of Berkshire. MUST we slaughter these beautiful creatures to provide an income? Surely not.
Graham Rodhouse, The Netherlands

Seems crazy to me. Why not actually continue the good work that has been done? I think the richer countries of the world should subsidise these countries for the money they would've received. We have a precious heritage and it needs protecting!!
Stephen Lynch, Chester, Wales

Absolutely. Let's scorch the earth and burn the skies until there's nothing left. And while we are at it why not hunt every living thing into extinction for the gratification of mankind?
Richard Hopkins, Cardiff, Wales

Whoever suggested lifting the ban, needs to think hard Are they willing to extract their healthy teeth to be decorated for a few coins?
Khalid Rahim, Toronto, Canada

Surely tourism is much more profitable?

Helen, UK

Definitely not. I can appreciate the need for jobs, but surely tourism is much more profitable? Programmes should be put in place in Africa to stop the fighting and encourage the preservation of the wildlife to the benefit of the local population.
Helen, Newcastle-upon-Tyne UK

Yes limited farming of ivory in a few controlled areas should be allowed, this ivory could be passed on to specially licensed dealers. The penalties for trading in illegal ivory should be increased, this should also included the purchase of ivory based products from none licensed dealers
Stephen G, UK Newcastle - Tyne

Humans cannot be trusted to protect nature! We need stronger laws to protect all animals.
Leonardo Calcagno, Montréal, P. Quebec, Canada

Only a sick country with no morals could consider lifting the ban

Mark Dent, UK

The future of the elephants is at risk if the ban on ivory is lifted. Only a sick country with no morals at all could even consider lifting the ban. It's the same situation where the whales are concerned. Why do we as people think we should abuse and kill wildlife for our own pleasure or economic gain? Before we know it they will all be gone.
Mark Dent, UK

The ban should never have been declared. It was made by animal rights people who think animals are people. On the other hand, why does the elephant have to die if the ivory is in the tusks? Why not just knock the elephant out just long enough to cut off his tusks?
Bryce, USA

It is not worth doing that for a stupid piece of jewellery

Mukand, USA

In response to Bryce's comments: Animals are living creatures and there is such a thing called a eco-cycle which you need to read up on. Why would anyone go to the difficulty of knocking down an elephant only to take a little bit of ivory when a majority of it is near the flesh? There have been cases where the animal has died in pain after the tusks have been ripped out. It is not worth doing that for a stupid piece of jewellery.
Mukand, USA

The bumper sticker answer: "Earth first! We can strip-mine the other nine planets later including all animal and flora population to decorate our homes."
Owais, Florida, USA