Elephants and the Ivory Trade

Share |

Brief Summary of Elephants and the Ivory Trade
Ann Linder (2016)

Ivory, which comes from elephant tusks, is considered very valuable. Because of the high price of ivory, poachers illegally kill elephants so that they can take their tusks and sell them. Tens of thousands of elephants are killed each year for their tusks, and as a result, elephant populations have declined rapidly.

The highest demand for ivory is in China, where tusks are carved into sculptures or used in other products. Many Chinese consider ivory a symbol of luck, wealth, and status. Other countries including the U.S. also have illegal ivory markets. CITES, the international body that governs endangered species, currently prohibits ivory trade because of the risks it poses to elephant conservation. Some African countries oppose this trade ban, while others, like Kenya, support it. In the United States, trading in ivory is prohibited with only a few exceptions. Federal laws and state laws restrict ivory sales.

Many African nations that are home to elephants suffer from other problems such as poverty and political corruption. As a result, the elephant conservation movement has focused on reducing demand in countries that purchase ivory. The long-term survival of the species is dependent upon international cooperative and effective enforcement.  If the ivory trade continues at its current rate, elephants may be faced with extinction.

Overview of Elephants and the Ivory Trade
Ann Linder (2016)

Ivory has long been valued for its aesthetic qualities, and can fetch prices of up to $1,000 a pound. Ivory comes from elephant tusks, which are type of teeth. Poachers illegally kill elephants in order to harvest and sell their tusks. As a result of the high demand for ivory, elephant populations have dropped significantly in recent years. More than 100,000 elephants were illegally poached from 2010 through 2012. The number of elephants today is likely less than 10% of what it was 100 years ago.

It is estimated that as much as 70% of ivory is imported to China, where carved ivory items are popular and considered a symbol of status. China is not the only consumer of ivory however. The United States, Thailand, Vietnam, Japan, and the Philippines also support large markets.

Poaching has become more sophisticated over the last decade. Today, poachers are often part of organized crime operations and armed with military-grade weapons. Some terrorist groups have been linked to poaching activities as well. Rangers, employed to protect the wildlife, are often killed alongside the elephants.

CITES, The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Flora and Fauna, is the foremost international law governing elephants and ivory. CITES offers three levels of regulation with Appendix I being the strongest and Appendix III being the most lax. Originally, African Elephants were listed under Appendix III until they were moved to Appendix II in 1977. During this time from 1977 on, they were governed by a hunting quota system. In 1990, Kenya along with the United States successfully lobbied for African elephants to be listed under Appendix I, banning all legal ivory trade.

However, source countries like South Africa and Namibia, along with consumer countries like China, have opposed the ivory trade ban, and pushed for ivory sales to continue. A few such sales have been allowed in recent years. Other countries, like the U.S. and Kenya have instead burned or crushed stockpiled ivory in attempts to signal that it should not be bought or sold.

In the United States, ivory sales are restricted by the African Elephant Conservation Act, the Lacey Act, as well a several state laws. In the last few years, the Obama Administration has issued a series of executive orders limiting ivory trade. On July 6, 2016, the White House announced a “near-total ban” on objects containing African elephant ivory. Though the regulations do not restrict personal possession of ivory, they prohibit sale and trade African ivory with only a few exceptions (items containing fewer than 200 grams of ivory and artifacts over 100 years old when presented along with verification).

The future of African elephant populations is tenuous, as poaching continues at high rates. Because of the political and economic difficulties faced by many African nations, the majority of conservation efforts have focused on limiting demand for ivory. The United States, however, seems to be moving in a singular direction toward increased protections and trade restrictions.

Related articles

Legal Trade in African Elephant Ivory: Buy Ivory to Save the Elephant? Sam B. Edwards, 7 Animal L. 119 (2001).

The (Inter)national Strategy: An Ivory Trade Ban In The United States And China, Morgan V. Manley, 38 Fordham Int'l L.J. 1511 (2015).

Related cases

H.J. Justin & Sons, Inc. v. Brown, 519 F. Supp. 1383 (E.D. Cal. 1981), aff'd in part, rev'd in part sub nom. H.J. Justin & Sons, Inc. v. Deukmejian, 702 F.2d 758 (9th Cir. 1983). Plaintiff filed suit challenging the California Penal Code, specifically sections 653o and 653r. Plaintiff manufactured boots from the hides of animals, including the hides of the African elephant, the Indonesian python, and the Wallaby kangaroo. Section 653o and 653r of the California Penal Code prevented plaintiff from selling his boots in California because the provisions forbid the sale of products made from dead bodies, or any part of the elephant, python, or kangaroo. Plaintiff challenged these provisions arguing that the provisions were preempted by CITES and by the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA), thus making the provisions unconstitutional. The plaintiff also argued that the provisions were unconstitutional because of the burden placed on interstate commerce which violates the Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. Ultimately, the court held that the provisions of the California Penal Code were not unconstitutional and dismissed plaintiff’s claim. The court looked to whether or not the provisions were expressly or impliedly preempted and determined that because the provisions were not expressly preempted the court needed to do an analysis of implied preemption. Looking to legislative history, the court found that Congress did not intend to preempt the provisions of the California Penal Code with the enactment of the ESA. Lastly, the court held that the California statue was not a burden on interstate commerce because Congress was aware of the existence of the California provisions and decided that the ESA would not affect the California provisions. As a result, the court dismissed plaintiff’s claim and held for the defendant.

Related laws

Federal Laws and International Treaties:

African Elephant Conservation Act (16 USC 4201 et seq.)

Endangered Species Act (ESA) (16 USC 1531 - 1544)

Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES)

U.S. State Laws:

Caifornia - § 2022. Prohibition on purchase and sale of ivory and rhinoceros horn; exceptions; criminal penalties (West's Ann. Cal. Fish & G. Code § 2022)

Hawaii - H R S § 183D -<Official classification pending> (Act 125, SB2647)

New Jersey - 23:2A-13.3. Prohibition on import, sale, purchase, etc. of ivory, ivory product, rhinoceros horn, or rhinoceros horn product; exceptions (NJSA 23:2A-13.3)

New York  - § 11-0535-a. Illegal ivory articles and rhinoceros horns (McKinney's E. C. L. § 11-0535-a)

Related Links

Links in the Web Center:

Topic Intro for Convention on Trade in Endangered Species (CITES)

External Links:

CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora), The Elephant Trade Information System (ETIS). A comprehensive information system to track illegal trade in ivory and other elephant products, https://cites.org/eng/prog/etis/index.php.

World Wildlife Fund (WWF), Threats to African Elephants, http://wwf.panda.org/what_we_do/endangered_species/elephants/african_elephants/afelephants_threats/.

National Geographic, Tracking the Illegal Tusk Trade. "Elephant ivory is now a key source of funding for armed groups in central Africa like the Lord’s Resistance Army. National Geographic commissioned the creation of artificial tusks with hidden GPS trackers that were planted in the smuggling supply chain." http://www.nationalgeographic.com/tracking-ivory/map.html

Share |