Perhaps better than any other occasion, CITES highlights the brewing controversy in how governments should protect endangered wildlife. Placing animals and plants on Appendix I effectively bans international trade in that species, with movements being restricted to all but the most stringently justified, noncommercial ventures. That puts emphasis on the question, "Can international commercial trade in endangered species or their parts be good for conservation?"
The consensus from this year's Conference of Parties seemed to be leaning towards the "no." Many species were uplisted, reducing the likelihood of legal trading in the future. Asian small-clawed otters received CITES I protection, a response to concerns of otters being taken from the wild to stock cute little "Otter Cafes" in Japan, where patrons can pet otters while they drink coffee. Many reptile species considered threatened by the pet trade were either listed for the first time or, for some species already listed (Indian star tortoise, pancake tortoise), moved from Appendix II to I. Giraffes were placed on CITES Appendix II, making it more difficult for trophy hunters to export hides and heads back home with them.
Much of the controversy swirled around two of Africa's biggest mammals. African elephants are always a lightning rod of controversy at CITES. The governments of eastern Africa want to protect their remaining herds by tightening international protections. The governments of southern Africa, which have more robust populations, want to sell off their stockpiles of ivory to raise more funds for conservation. They also have expressed interest in selling live elephants, especially to Chinese facilities (but obviously of interest to zoos worldwide, some of whom have received elephants that were slated to be culled due to overpopulation in southern Africa). Similar issues have raged around white rhinos, with the southern Africans open to the idea of sending off rhinos to be commercially farmed for their horns. The votes came down in favor of the east Africans, with tighter protection and reduced trade opportunities.
As an interesting side note, this CoP saw the first ever debate about listed an extinct animal on CITES - the woolly mammoth. Some parties were concerned that dealers might try to bypass ivory bans by claiming that the tusks of elephants were actually from mammoths (an increasing amount of ivory is being exposed as the permafrost melts). This motion did not pass.
Zoos are represented at CITES, as are many other professions relating to animals, sometimes to advocate for stricter protections, sometimes to caution about the unintended impact that other restrictions may have. CITES doesn't just govern the transfer of wild-born animals to zoos; permits are also required to send zoo-bred animals from one facility to another as part of breeding programs (such as a snow leopard from Canada to the United States). It's fair to say that the elephant issue was the one being watched most closely item of the agenda, as it makes it extremely unlikely that additional elephant rescues will be allowed (or at least a lot harder).
I am worried that the governments of southern Africa, finding themselves with bigger and bigger herds that they cannot reduce through other means, will increase culling, which will then just result in more stockpiled ivory.
There are few easy answers at the CITES Convention of Parties. Everyone wants the same thing - populations of endangered species to be secure and safe in the wild. The problem is just that no one can agree on how to get there.
No comments:
Post a Comment