Ministry Clarifies Cites Proposal Issue

Re: Recent article by Mr. Will Travers of the Born Free Foundation titled “Namibia must withdraw CITES proposal” (The Namibian 14 September 2004)

Your readers should know that the organization that Mr Travers heads (the Born Free Foundation), and the broader coalition of non-Governmental organizations that he represents (the Species Survival Network), are completely opposed to all forms of trade in wildlife, no matter the circumstances or the link between such trade and conservation. It is therefore rather predictable what his position would be concerning Namibia’s CITES proposals.To avoid any misunderstanding, we would like to provide the following information concerning our elephant proposal to CITES.In this proposal, Namibia seeks the following, in addition to existing provisions concerning trade in elephants and their products: * an annual quota of 2000 kg raw ivory from natural and management related mortalities, * trade in worked ivory products for commercial purposes, and * trade in elephant leather and hair goods for commercial purposes.Namibia has twice received approval to undertake a one-off sale and export of elephant ivory derived from natural mortalities and management related practices.In 1999, the tenth meeting of the CITES Conference of Parties (CoP10) approved the sale of certain ivory stocks.This sale took place in 1999 and was successful in all respects.Namibia complied with all requirements as were set out by CoP10, the Standing Committee of CITES and the CITES Secretariat.To date there is no evidence that the 1999 sale led to any increase in illegal killing of elephants or illegal trade, as also confirmed by independent research.At the twelfth meeting of the CITES Conference of Parties (CoP12) Namibia received approval for a further one-off quota of 10 tons subject to a number of conditions, one such condition was that Namibia, Botswana and South Africa can only trade once the CITES programme on the Monitoring of Illegal Killing of Elephants (MIKE) has reported to CITES Secretariat on the baseline information such as elephant population numbers and incidences of illegal killing.This has not yet taken place (although adequate information is available for most reference sites).Namibia supports this monitoring programme but is concerned that those opposing trade may manipulate this undertaking to achieve their own purposes rather than see a functional and valuable monitoring system in place.The proposed annual quotas, if approved, will only come into effect after the CoP12 – approved one-off sale has taken place, and would only comprise of ivory that would have been collected since this one-off sale.In the light of the delay in this process, and the 2-3 year intervals between CITES meetings, Namibia had no choice other than to request annual quotas.Those opposed to ivory trade would of course prefer to delay the process as much as possible, and force Namibia to repeatedly apply for permission to trade in small amounts to each CITES meeting.This amounts to a frustration of our conservation programme and imposes unfair costs on a developing country who has already demonstrated that it has complied with all CITES requirements and whose elephant population is expanding.Regarding the trade in worked ivory, Namibia has a long standing history of ivory carving, specifically the production of the items locally known as ‘ekipas’.Ekipas that are available on the market today originate from several decades ago and have antique status (and are therefore exempt from CITES).This supply is running out and much of Namibia’s cultural history has already been lost in this way.A high demand exists for these items within the modern jewellery manufacturing industry in Namibia.We are therefore working to create a partnership between traditional carvers and manufacturing jewellers, to produce jewellery pieces of high quality in design and value.This programme is furthermore designed to revitalize cultural traditions, transfer skills, to create new enterprises and to support elephant conservation and management through our conservancy programme.To enable these products to be sold to tourists and internationally, as they deserve to be because of the high quality of design and manufacturing, approval is required from CITES.A comprehensive control system has been designed for such trade, and each participant (carver or jeweller) and each item (ekipa and finished jewellery piece) will be individually registered.All items for trade will be individually marked, and a certificate for each will be issued.The argument that controlled ivory trade will lead to increased illegal hunting or illegal in other countries has always been used by protectionists or animal rights groups who are opposed to any form of wildlife utilisation.It is clear that the so-called ban on ivory trade imposed in 1989 did not stop the illegal ivory trade, and it is unrealistic to believe that the continuation of the ban will have any greater success in the future.There are far more important factors that will determine the future of elephants in other countries.The factors that really threaten African elephant populations are the loss of habitat mainly as result of human-elephant conflicts, insufficient resources to support proper law enforcement, political instability and the existing uncontrolled ivory markets in a number of countries worldwide.A total ivory ban is not the solution to these threats.Namibia as a sovereign country and a Party to CITES is entitled to trade products such as ivory within the framework of CITES, if the specific conditions for such trade within the Convention have been met.We have abundantly demonstrated that this is the case.No-one is disputing that Namibia has an effective elephant conservation programme, an expanding elephant population (now estimated to be more than 12,000), an effective community-based natural resource management programme, an effective statutory mechanism for reinvesting trade revenues into these programmes, and the ability to regulate all aspects of international trade in ivory and other elephant products.There is no legitimacy in holding Namibia hostage to unfounded fears and concerns, or to hold us back while other countries with elephants get their conservation and trade controls in place.This would amount to punishing success and undermining our rights as a country and our conservation and development objectives and programmes.This is the case that we will shortly be making in Thailand at CITES CoP13.We expect to receive opposition to our proposals, but we also count on support from the many countries that have previously supported us, not to mention support from the Namibian public.Lastly, we are not required within Southern Africa to have identical approaches concerning CITES, but we are pleased that we have the support from all SADC Member States in this matter, even those who were not in a position to make their own trade proposals on this occasion.Thank you for the interest shown by your newspaper in this issue.M. Lindeque Permanent Secretary Ministry Of Environment and TourismIt is therefore rather predictable what his position would be concerning Namibia’s CITES proposals.To avoid any misunderstanding, we would like to provide the following information concerning our elephant proposal to CITES.In this proposal, Namibia seeks the following, in addition to existing provisions concerning trade in elephants and their products: * an annual quota of 2000 kg raw ivory from natural and management related mortalities, * trade in worked ivory products for commercial purposes, and * trade in elephant leather and hair goods for commercial purposes.Namibia has twice received approval to undertake a one-off sale and export of elephant ivory derived from natural mortalities and management related practices.In 1999, the tenth meeting of the CITES Conference of Parties (CoP10) approved the sale of certain ivory stocks.This sale took place in 1999 and was successful in all respects.Namibia complied with all requirements as were set out by CoP10, the Standing Committee of CITES and the CIT
ES Secretariat.To date there is no evidence that the 1999 sale led to any increase in illegal killing of elephants or illegal trade, as also confirmed by independent research.At the twelfth meeting of the CITES Conference of Parties (CoP12) Namibia received approval for a further one-off quota of 10 tons subject to a number of conditions, one such condition was that Namibia, Botswana and South Africa can only trade once the CITES programme on the Monitoring of Illegal Killing of Elephants (MIKE) has reported to CITES Secretariat on the baseline information such as elephant population numbers and incidences of illegal killing.This has not yet taken place (although adequate information is available for most reference sites).Namibia supports this monitoring programme but is concerned that those opposing trade may manipulate this undertaking to achieve their own purposes rather than see a functional and valuable monitoring system in place.The proposed annual quotas, if approved, will only come into effect after the CoP12 – approved one-off sale has taken place, and would only comprise of ivory that would have been collected since this one-off sale.In the light of the delay in this process, and the 2-3 year intervals between CITES meetings, Namibia had no choice other than to request annual quotas.Those opposed to ivory trade would of course prefer to delay the process as much as possible, and force Namibia to repeatedly apply for permission to trade in small amounts to each CITES meeting.This amounts to a frustration of our conservation programme and imposes unfair costs on a developing country who has already demonstrated that it has complied with all CITES requirements and whose elephant population is expanding.Regarding the trade in worked ivory, Namibia has a long standing history of ivory carving, specifically the production of the items locally known as ‘ekipas’.Ekipas that are available on the market today originate from several decades ago and have antique status (and are therefore exempt from CITES).This supply is running out and much of Namibia’s cultural history has already been lost in this way.A high demand exists for these items within the modern jewellery manufacturing industry in Namibia.We are therefore working to create a partnership between traditional carvers and manufacturing jewellers, to produce jewellery pieces of high quality in design and value.This programme is furthermore designed to revitalize cultural traditions, transfer skills, to create new enterprises and to support elephant conservation and management through our conservancy programme.To enable these products to be sold to tourists and internationally, as they deserve to be because of the high quality of design and manufacturing, approval is required from CITES.A comprehensive control system has been designed for such trade, and each participant (carver or jeweller) and each item (ekipa and finished jewellery piece) will be individually registered.All items for trade will be individually marked, and a certificate for each will be issued.The argument that controlled ivory trade will lead to increased illegal hunting or illegal in other countries has always been used by protectionists or animal rights groups who are opposed to any form of wildlife utilisation.It is clear that the so-called ban on ivory trade imposed in 1989 did not stop the illegal ivory trade, and it is unrealistic to believe that the continuation of the ban will have any greater success in the future.There are far more important factors that will determine the future of elephants in other countries.The factors that really threaten African elephant populations are the loss of habitat mainly as result of human-elephant conflicts, insufficient resources to support proper law enforcement, political instability and the existing uncontrolled ivory markets in a number of countries worldwide.A total ivory ban is not the solution to these threats. Namibia as a sovereign country and a Party to CITES is entitled to trade products such as ivory within the framework of CITES, if the specific conditions for such trade within the Convention have been met.We have abundantly demonstrated that this is the case.No-one is disputing that Namibia has an effective elephant conservation programme, an expanding elephant population (now estimated to be more than 12,000), an effective community-based natural resource management programme, an effective statutory mechanism for reinvesting trade revenues into these programmes, and the ability to regulate all aspects of international trade in ivory and other elephant products. There is no legitimacy in holding Namibia hostage to unfounded fears and concerns, or to hold us back while other countries with elephants get their conservation and trade controls in place.This would amount to punishing success and undermining our rights as a country and our conservation and development objectives and programmes.This is the case that we will shortly be making in Thailand at CITES CoP13.We expect to receive opposition to our proposals, but we also count on support from the many countries that have previously supported us, not to mention support from the Namibian public.Lastly, we are not required within Southern Africa to have identical approaches concerning CITES, but we are pleased that we have the support from all SADC Member States in this matter, even those who were not in a position to make their own trade proposals on this occasion. Thank you for the interest shown by your newspaper in this issue.M. Lindeque Permanent Secretary Ministry Of Environment and Tourism