Cosmas Butuny, East African
January 17, 2010

The secretariat of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) has come under fire over its handling of the row over ivory trade in the East African region.

Kenya is blaming the secretariat for the dispute that pits it and Rwanda on one side against Tanzania on the other.

The full article is posted under "latest News".

Regrettably there it cannot be discussed therefore I have opened y new theard here.

I first didn't know to WHERE to post:

Wildlife Protection?
Environmental Protection?
International Widlife?
etc etc

as that topic and the credibility of CITES - or the lack of it - I think makes a great opportunity for all to post their opinions.

Happy Posting !

I am looking forward to your inputs!

Let me start the discussion off if I may. In my naivete I thought CITES was initiated to PROTECT wildlife.
The more I see and hear, I realize it is not protecting wildlife at all but is strictly about TRADE in wildlife products. They don't give a damn about what happens to the wildlife as long as the trade continues.

I have been thinking the last few days about what Kenya could do to foil the Tanzania-Zambia wish to sell all their ivory despite the nine year moratorium on trade put on at the last CITES meeting and despite the increased poaching. (I also didn't realize that the moratorium was only for those countries that got to sell their ivory last year. I thought it was for all signatories).

Kenya feels another ivory bonfire won't work again. Wish I knew of some mercenaries who could get there and explode the Tanz and Zambian storage facilities and all the ivory along with it. I'm sure a lot of that is from poaching in the Selous where the poachers haven't been quick enough to havest the ivory or buried it to go back and get it later. They have been having a field day in the Selous this year.

We all know CITES is full of BU++++it when it states that any ivory sold is from elephants who died natural deaths, not from poaching or hunting. Every single article comes out with the phase "who died of natural death" and it is totally dishonest trying to get sympathy from unknowing people.

Wish I knew all the answers, but as always, it is the wildlife that suffers.
- Edited by Jan on 18.01.2010, 03:52 -

Jan
I support every thought you have very well formulated!
I am also very anti-Cites for obvious reasons.

As long as there is ivory sales - poaching will be encouraged.

Instead of "monitoring the sale" the UN should create a kind of "World heritage species" which under any circumstance has to be protected.

Here are some links to "bodies" which are all involved in each other, feed governments in order to serve their hunting interests and also CITES.

Do have a look at the personnel:

http://www.cic-wildlife.org/index.php?id=72
http://www.wildlife-baldus.com/start.html[/color]