The Death Of Elephants: Ivory Trading Nations Exposed
Pablo Barjavel
Due to our investigations, we have exposed organised ivory trafficking networks in China, Laos, Malaysia, Malawi, Mozambique, Tanzania, Vietnam and Zambia that have been responsible for the large-scale destruction of elephant populations across Africa.
The paper, published Feb. 14 in the journal Nature Human Behaviour, incorporates results from DNA testing of more than 4,000 African elephant tusks from 49 different ivory seizures made in 12 African nations over a 17-year period.
Using data from a previous DNA study by coauthor Samuel Wasser, the team also was able to tell where the elephants had lived. Through this, they discovered that tusks from East Africa were moving faster than those from other regions. This, said Uno, could be because East African elephants are exposed in open savannahs, where they can be shot down with abandon and the ivory shipped out quickly. In other regions, they dwell in dense forests, where they are harder to harvest en masse.
Current discussion of how to reduce poaching focuses on two areas: reducing demand16,17, and reducing supply18. In recent years, increased demand for ivory in East Asia and particularly China is widely perceived to be the ultimate driver of increased poaching in Africa, primarily based on analysis of the destinations of intercepted ivory shipments4, the growth in per capita income19 and the traditional market for ivory in China20. Combined with an increasingly large economic involvement of China in Africa, shortening the links between resource and market, Chinese demand has been blamed for rising ivory prices and fuelling the rapid increase in illegal activity21. The illegal trade in ivory, however, is complicated: certainly Chinese demand is important, but recently more large seizures of raw ivory were made in Thailand, with transit centres for shipping to other East Asian states such as Malaysia, the Philippines and Vietnam4. Reducing demand has been seen as a crucial step in stemming poaching in Africa18, yet the economics of illegal trade make this complicated22: trade bans and associated ivory seizures may even increase poaching incentives by causing price rises in elephant ivory23.
African elephant carcass data were collected as part of the Monitoring the Illegal Killing of Elephants (MIKE) programme, which was instituted by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) in 2002 and since then has worked with wildlife authorities across Africa to implement a ranger-based monitoring programme. The programme collates annual carcass counts from 53 sites (mostly protected areas, but often extending into neighbouring unprotected zones) in 29 countries across sub-saharan Africa. Full details of the monitoring methods are described elsewhere12, but, in essence, rangers on regular patrols record the location of any elephant carcass encountered and identify whether death was the result of natural mortality, management or illegal killing (almost always poaching for ivory, but very occasionally the result of retaliation in human-elephant conflict). Between 2002 and 2017, the programme has recorded 18,007 carcasses in Africa, of which 8860 were identified as illegal killings, providing 607 observations from 53 sites in 16 years (includes all records received by February 2018). Several sites did not report carcasses every year, or joined the programme later than 2002.
South Africa's claim that its elephants were well managed was not seriously challenged. However, its role in the illegal ivory trade and slaughter of elephants in neighbouring countries was exposed in numerous news articles of the time, as part of its policy of destabilisation of its neighbours. 95% of South Africa's elephants were found in Kruger National Park[17] which was partly run by the South African Defence Force (SADF) which trained, supplied and equipped the rebel Mozambique army RENAMO.[18] RENAMO was heavily implicated in large-scale ivory poaching to finance its army.[17][19][20][21]
Zimbabwe had embraced "sustainable" use policies of its wildlife, seen by some governments and the WWF as a pattern for future conservation. Conservationists and biologists hailed Zimbabwe's Communal Areas Management Programme for Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE) as a template for community empowerment in conservation.[22] The failure to prevent the Appendix One listing through CITES came as a blow to this movement. Zimbabwe may have made the career of some biologists, but it was not honest with its claims. The government argued the ivory trade would fund conservation efforts, but revenues were instead returned to the central treasury.[17] Its elephant census was accused of double counting elephants crossing its border with Botswana by building artificial waterholes. The ivory trade was also wildly out of control within its borders, with Zimbabwe National Army (ZNA) involvement in poaching in Gonarezhou National Park and other areas.[17] More sinister was the alleged murder of a string of whistle-blowers, including a Capt. Nleya, who claimed the ZNA was involved in rhinoceros and elephant poaching in Mozambique. Nleya was found hanged at his army barracks near Hwange National Park. The death was reported as suicide by the army, but declared a murder by a magistrate. Nleya's widow was reportedly later threatened by anonymous telephone calls.[23][24][25][26]
In 2018, a study by Avaaz sponsored by Oxford University indicated that legal antique ivory trading in the European Union continues to fuel the poaching of elephants. It is believed that a legal loophole that allows for the trading of old ivory masks the sale of items made of ivory from more recently killed elephants.[82]
Humans have coveted ivory for thousands of years, and demand eventually pushed elephants to the brink. International trade in their tusks is now banned, but a newer product on the global market could be fuelling the flames for elephants: mammoth tusks.
Kenyan officials say Esmond Bradley Martin, an American investigator into the illegal ivory and rhino horn trade, has been found stabbed to death in his house in Nairobi. Martin is seen here in 2016. Brian Inganga/AP hide caption
There have been numerous strategies implemented to cease the commercial poaching of elephants in South Africa. Strategies that have been implemented in South Africa and Asia, where the demand for ivory is high, have addressed aspects of the poaching system. There are countries in Africa, including Botswana and the Congo, where it is legal to shoot and kill poachers if they are caught in the act. These regulations, often referred to as shoot-to-kill policies, have been widely discussed and are a very controversial topic in Africa (White, 2014). There have also been other less aggressive methods that have been implemented in South Africa such as regulations aimed to stop the illegal trafficking of animal products being transported out of Africa. Laws and regulations have also been put in place in China to stop the purchasing of illegal animal products (Harvey, 2018; Meijer, 2018). These laws and regulations are usually enforced at ports of entry or through customs where it is most common for illegal trafficking to happen. Organizations in Africa are also trying to rebuild habitat for elephants, which is also helping to raise elephant populations. These different organizations are generally non-profit and are sustained by donations or government funds.
A policy that was eventually implemented in 2017 in China that had been discussed for many years is illegalizing the sale of elephant ivory in China. The World Wildlife Fund has been interviewing people since the implementation of this policy about their incentives (if any) to purchase or sell elephant ivory now that it is illegal. Their results show that all pre-banned illegal ivory shops that were visited by wildlife tracking experts in 2018 have stopped selling ivory, and the scale of illegal ivory trade has seriously diminished in most of the cities that the online platforms have been studying (Harvey, 2018; Meijer, 2018). This ban on trading elephant ivory has shown to work in some of the major cities in China, but there are also large issues along the China-Vietnam border and in Vietnam because Vietnam does not have an ivory ban.
Table 3 F tests of significance of effects retained in the final model relating elephant mortality probability (cause of death=ivory hunting set as the baseline category) to predictor variables and their interactions.
Table 4 F tests of the significance of the effects retained in the final model relating elephant mortality probability (cause of death=ivory poaching set as the baseline category) to predictor variables and their interactions.
In the southern Bago Yoma mountain range in Myanmar, Asian elephants are being killed at a disturbing rate. This emerging crisis was identified initially through a telemetry study when 7 of 19 of collared elephants were poached within a year of being fitted with a satellite-GPS collar. Subsequent follow up of ground teams confirmed the human caused death or disappearance of at least 19 elephants, including the seven collared individuals, within a 35 km2 area in less than two years. The carcasses of 40 additional elephants were found in areas located across south-central Myanmar once systematic surveys began by our team and collaborators. In addition to the extreme rate of loss, this study documents the targeting of elephants for their skin instead of the more common ivory, an increasing trend in Myanmar. Intensive research programs focused on other conservation problems identified this issue and are now encouraging local authorities to prioritize anti-poaching efforts and improve conservation policies within the country. Myanmar represents one of the last remaining countries in Asia with substantial wildlands suitable for elephants. Increasing rates of human-elephant conflict and poaching events in this country pose a dire threat to the global population.
e2b47a7662