Leading Articles

null 0° London Hi 5°C / Lo 2°C

Leading article: Save the elephant from China

Tuesday, 15 July 2008

If the People's Republic of China is licensed as an official buyer of elephant ivory at a UN meeting in Geneva today, it will be one of the biggest setbacks to have occurred in international wildlife conservation, and a dire threat to the future survival of elephants in the wild both in Africa and in Asia.

China wants to be allowed to bid for ivory from four southern African countries – South Africa, Namibia, Botswana and Zimbabwe – which were given permission to trade in ivory in 1997 in a misguided decision by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species – only eight years after Cites member states, including Britain, had agreed to ban the ivory trade completely all around the world.

The 1989 total ban was seen as the only way to choke off the demand for ivory that was sending African elephant populations plunging at the hands of poachers. And it worked, and poaching declined sharply thereafter. The partial lifting of the ban in 1997 was a worrying development but, at least in the subsequent auction of 50 tons of ivory, the sale was limited to one country – Japan – as the other potential buyer, China, was regarded as having insufficient safeguards against illegal trading. Now another auction is in prospect, and China wants to join in, claiming that it has cleaned up its act.

To allow it to do so would be disastrous. It does not matter how tight China's enforcement procedures now are. Overnight the world market for ivory would balloon, providing myriad opportunities for illicit ivory to be laundered into the legal stock, and offering temptation to poachers right across Africa, where at least 20,000 elephants a year are currently being illegally killed.

Disturbingly, the British Government, which has a vote in the meeting, looks as though it will go along with China's wishes. Yet ministers will not come clean about Britain's voting intentions. Yesterday they were engaged in that shabbiest of official procedures, hiding behind officials, with the Department for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (Defra) claiming that the matter rested on the judgement of the Defra official at the meeting, Trevor Salmon.

To pretend that the British Government's policy on a question of major international importance is dependent solely on the view of a mid-ranking civil servant from Bristol is laughable. The Biodiversity minister, Joan Ruddock, needs to spell out what her position is, as does her boss, the Environment Secretary, Hilary Benn. Britain should vote firmly against allowing China to buy ivory. If it does not, and the bad times return for yet another threatened species, at least we will know where responsibility lies.

Interesting? Click here to explore further

Let's say I come from a culture that doesn't eat pork or beef. How would you react if I criticized the UK for killing pigs and cows ?
Want to go further? How about I castigate your mother for wearing fur coats? Maybe that fur came from a cute, defenceless seal clubbed to death in Canada. How about the cruel sport of pheasant hunting that's so popular in Europe? Why should poor innocent birds be shot for 'sport'?
Endangered species? OK, next time you open a tin of plain old tuna, look up 'tuna' on the Internet. Populations of this commonest of food fishes are being decimated at an alarming rate - just because you want tuna sandwich for lunch.
You want to talk about cruelty to animals? Have you forgotten how chickens are raised in battery cages? How their bodies are mutilated just so you can enjoy eggs for breakfast and KFC.
I agree ivory trading is probably wrong. But before voicing your self-righteous fury, just look at what you yourself are doing to animals. See the hypocrisy?

Posted by Aga | 17.07.08, 08:09 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Animals have feelings, but most humans don't!

Posted by Rachel | 16.07.08, 12:41 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

I find it truly shocking that in this day and age that there is ANY legal trade in ivory allowed at all. Killing elephants for their tusks cannot be any different than killing gorillas for their hands. Add in rhino horns, shark fins, etc, etc - the list seems endless - and all to satisfy a Chinese market for exotic animal parts. However, if the world is going to give Japan - the nation of vicious whale butchers - the right to buy ivory, then how can it justify not allowing other countries to buy ivory. Then the snowball effect will come as other countries will want to get into the game as well.

The ivory trade should be banned, and the snivelling and spineless stance of Mr Brown and his government on this issue is deplorable!

Posted by Douglas Smith | 15.07.08, 18:07 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Is your article title misleading? It implies China is about to kill a "elephant". The fact: besides Japan, China is also asking the permission to bid a "ivory" auction. The intent is ....?

Posted by Oceanview | 15.07.08, 12:52 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

'Bye-bye elephants - and all to keep the Chinese happy! Too bad that there are no elephants in Westminster and Whitehall; they seem unloved by the dinosaurs who have somehow managed to survive there.

Posted by Peter Rosser | 15.07.08, 12:36 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

"The amount that China can buy will be limited, so what's the problem to fuss about?"

A: Aren't there two little things called 'principle' & 'precedent'?

This has to have been the most hypocritical government I have ever seen. Can't believe it, I really can't.

Not that any other major party would behave any differently under pressure from whatever interest really has a hand on the reigns of power.

But none of us has the strength to make the 'sacrifices' necessary to remove at least our own little society from the dirty, global back-scratching that goes on in the name of economic progress, so why don't we just return to 'three monkey mode'?

The indigestion that results from swallowing the guilt caused by your feigned ignorance is uncomfortable, but return to the 'Daily Mail' and the pain shall soon be eased.

Either that or accept the fact that much of what we accept as normal is rotten, and the only people that can do anything to change anything is US!

But do what?

Posted by Easily Me | 15.07.08, 10:27 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

This can not happen!!!!!! Please STOP this horrible greed!

Posted by Ana | 15.07.08, 09:56 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Why do we have to have such a weak, flustering Prime Minister? He seems to be terrified of upsetting China and yet across the Channel when the Chinese warned the French against receiving the Dalai Lama, Sarkozy told them to butt out.

And what did our heroic Prime Minister do when faced with similar sinister warnings from the Chinese? In true fashion he caved in and refused to meet the Dalai Lama at No 10 - instead downgrading the importance of the visit and meeting him at Lambeth Palace.

By giving in to the Chinese over ivory, Gordon is showing again that he doesn't have the moral courage to do the right thing.

Posted by David Fletcher | 15.07.08, 09:07 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

The amount that China can buy will be limited, so what's the problem to fuss about?

Posted by Cool Head | 15.07.08, 03:11 GMT

Post a complaint

Please note all fields are required.

Contact details

Columnist Comments

deborah_orr

Deborah Orr: One more inquiry isn't going to help

I don't believe a public inquiry into the Baby P case is necessary

hamish_mcrae

Hamish McRae: It will take time, but we'll recover

If officialdom seems over-optimistic in its forecasts, the markets seem too pessimistic

janet_street_porter

Janet Street-Porter: Mother does not always know best

One of the most sensitive subjects for writers is the mother-daughter relationship

mark_steel

Mark Steel: Never mind the baby, just get back to work

The next thing will be an exciting new scheme known as the 'workhouse'