Limited ivory trade thwarted

"We have taken a lot of measures to educate our tourists not to buy any products of endangered species of wild flora and fauna, especially ivory and its products, which are strictly forbidden from international trade by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES)," Meng Xianlin, Deputy Director General of the Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora Import and Export management office, told ChinAfrica.

Meng, who recently returned from the 15th CITES Conference of the Parties held in Doha on March 13-25, said that unfortunately many people failed to realize the seriousness of bringing ivory products in to China.

At the conference, some countries in Southern Africa, such as Tanzania and Zambia proposed to down list African elephants from CITES Appendix I to Appendix II, which meant limited international trade can be allowed. Strongly objected by some other Africa countries such as Kenya, the proposal was finally denied.

African elephants were listed in Appendix I in 1989 for strict protection. From 1990, international trade in ivory was strictly banned, following the big mammals' teetering on the edge of extinction in 1970s and 1980s. With the soaring price of ivory and its products in the international market, more than 700,000 African elephants were slaughtered during this time, especially in East and Central Africa. The population of African elephants dropped sharply from 1.2 million to about 450,000.

"It was against this background that African elephants were under strict protection by CITES since 1989," said Meng. In 2008, as proposed by some African countries, CITES decided to prolong the ban to 2017.

China's tough measures

Educating Chinese tourists not to buy ivory products is only a small part of China's efforts in fighting the illicit importation of ivory. According to Meng, China has been taking severe measures to regulate ivory trade, processing and sales ever since the international trade of ivory was strictly banned in 1990.

Meng noted that China, a CITES signatory since 1981, has a set of complete measures to regulate the ivory import procedures and sales.

The first part of the measures involves the ivory processing sector. China has a strict market access system for ivory processing enterprises, which should all be approved by the State Forestry Administration. By 2009, China had 33 qualified factories, most of which are small operations. "One of the most important conditions for the approval is that these enterprises should have legal ivory stockpiles," said Meng.

To bring the sales chain under control, the Chinese Government designated some 100 shops nationwide to sell ivory products. All the products can be traced back to their original tusk and records are kept of its weight and length. "We have a special database for these tusks and their products, and only those products with the official labels are regarded as legal. Those who sell illegal ivory products will be severely dealt with," said Meng, adding that these measures can minimize the utilization and sales of ivory products from illegal sources in China.

China's efforts in fighting against the illegal ivory trade have won the confidence of the global community. Statistics from the Working and Information Document of ETIS (Elephant Trade Information System) of 2010 show that China demonstrates once again the second highest ivory seizure ranking and the largest seizures of ivory by weight. China also ranks first in terms of having the highest percentage of its trade by weight occurring since 1999. For these reasons, China remains the most important contemporary player in the illicit ivory trade.

"With the increase of exchanges between China and other countries, it is always a challenge for us to combat smuggling. I hope, all the countries involved in ivory trade, including the countries of origin, transfer countries and destination countries, can work together to fight against the illicit ivory international trade," said Meng.

ChinAfrica contacted the embassies of Kenya and Zambia for comment but at time of press had received no reply.