Africa Wild

Investigation reveals a highly organised ivory trade across Asia and Africa

A new report uncovers the fact that Chinese ivory traffickers are present in virtually every African state, and operate at nearly every point along the supply chain.

The report, called Out of Africa; Criminalisation of the African Ivory Trade, was commissioned by Born Free USA and C4ADS (a nonprofit organisation that is dedicated to data-driven analysis and evidence-based reporting of conflict and security issues worldwide), and focuses on the entire supply chain from source to end user.

It found that despite its global scale, the majority of the illegal ivory trade is dominated by a small number of networks, and that the majority of the ivory is shipped via just 100 large annual consignments that make up 70-80 per cent of the trade.

Seizures across multiple countries and commodities often appear to trace back to the same individuals and networks, and traffickers, particularly Chinese, straddle Africa and Asia and are linked to seizures in nearly every African range state and at nearly every stage along the supply chain.

The report also revealed that the majority of the illegal ivory travels through a small number of ports and airports on its way to Asia. The three main ports are Mombasa, Dar es Salaam, and Zanzibar, while the top three airports in the chain are Nairobi, Addis Ababa, and Johannesburg.

Adam M Roberts, CEO of The Born Free Foundation and Born Free USA said: “The ivory trade is operating today at the highest level since the 1989 commercial ivory trade ban. Our investigation reveals that between 2009 and June 2014, there were more than 90 large-scale ivory seizures, collectively weighing almost 170 tons, that bear the hallmarks of international organised crime.

"This would amount to approximately 229,729 elephants killed and trafficked in fewer than six years.”

"It is well known that East Asian nationals, and, in particular, the Chinese, drive the modern ivory trade. However, the scale we found in our investigation was shocking; Chinese traffickers are present in virtually every single African range state, and operate at nearly every point along the ivory supply chain."

Varun Vira, Chief of Analysis at C4ADS and co-author of the report said, “The ivory trade is worth billions of dollars but is still talked about as if it were an unprofessional, disorganised, and artisanal industry, of concern only to conservationists.

"In reality, it is a highly organised, complex global crime that has avoided consequence for decades. However, our report reveals that there may be as few as 100 large-scale ivory containers moving annually that drive the vast majority of the entire illegal trade.

"Focusing efforts on intercepting these containers and tracing back their owners and facilitators can have a real impact on the trade."
http://www.wildlifeextra.com/do/ecco.py ... &live=0#cr

A car covered in carved ivory and yak bone was auctioned in 2010 in China.

No disrespect to the reporters, but it has been pretty much an open secret for many years now?

China comes to Africa, builds infrastructure and is hailed, takes away raw materials, and smuggles ivory etc. out...don't even know if "smuggles" applies...they have local officials in their pockets?

Elephant conservation: The need for political will

BY SHAUN SWINGLER - 02 OCTOBER, 2014 - DAILY MAVERICK - FREE TO REPUBLISH

The greatest threat to the safety of Africa’s elephants is not the poachers who prey on them for their tusks; rather it’s the governments of many of their homelands who lack the political will to ensure their safety. Indeed these very governments are in many cases complicit in the demise of these great animals. By SHAUN SWINGLER.

In 2010, Chad had a poaching problem of such magnitude that its elephants were on the brink of extinction in Zakouma National Park. In five years its elephant population plummeted from 4,000 to 450 as poachers wreaked havoc on the herds.

The slaughter of 60 elephants by Sudanese poachers in early 2010 was the final straw. The government called on African Parks Network, an NPO which manages seven African national parks, to take control of Zakouma in an effort to stop the carnage. Between 2010 and 2013 Zakouma’s elephant population had stabilised, and this year the population has actually increased.

This success wouldn’t have been possible had the Chadian government not shown the political will to bring in African Parks, giving them full management control of Zakouma.

Encouragingly, this is not an isolated example of the country’s commitment to saving its elephants. In February this year, the Chadian president, Idriss Déby Itno, signed an agreement which places a 10-year moratorium on any request for permission from the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) to sell Chad’s ivory stockpile. And as an even stronger gesture of goodwill, in the same month the country burnt its 1.1 tonne ivory stockpile.

In a region where the elephant population has dropped by 62% in the last decade, according to a 2013 academic report, Chad’s message is now more important than ever.

Further south, Botswana’s elephant population is thriving. With an estimated 150,000 elephants, according to the WWF, it has the biggest population in Africa – and continues to grow by 5% annually. In part this is due to the country’s small human population, but it is also because Botswana’s stable government has continually committed to ensuring the safety and well-being of its elephants, by deploying its military year round to guard against poachers.

In what many have called a ground-breaking decision, in December 2013 Botswana placed a ban on trophy hunting on state land on the basis that the trophy hunting industry was difficult to regulate, made it easier to facilitate illegal hunting, and had little benefit to local communities.

Conservation groups celebrated the decision, saying it would put pressure on neighbouring countries to take the same action.

Chad and Botswana show us that real improvements can be seen when countries commit their resources to protecting their animals. Unfortunately, countries with strong political will such as this are rare. There are still far too many examples of governments plagued with red tape, bureaucracy and corruption that are failing in their fight to save Africa’s elephants.

In 2013, CITES singled out Kenya and Tanzania as part of its ‘Gang of 8’ problematic countries. They were criticised for lacking any semblance of a competent national action plan to combat the rampant poaching and Interpol has identified them as major source and transit countries in the illegal ivory trade. Sadly, the ‘Gang of 8′ has recently swelled to a total of 19 countries identified by CITES as lacking national action plans to combat poaching. African countries on this list include: Uganda, Angola, Cameroon, Congo, DRC, Egypt, Ethiopia, Gabon, Mozambique and Nigeria.

These national action plans are important because poaching is huge business in Africa. Without clear and concrete plans, it’s going to be impossible for these countries to stay ahead of organised and ruthless international poaching syndicates – wildlife trade being the fourth biggest illicit market in the world after humans, arms and drugs.

Worryingly, Kenyan authorities appear to be in denial about the extent of the problem. Kenyans United Against Poaching, a consortium of community groups, gathered 20,000 signatures to encourage Kenyan President Uhuru Kenyatta to declare poaching a national disaster. The Kenyan Ministry of Environment along with Kenyan Wildlife Services (KWS) have hit back with what can only be described as dangerous claims that poaching has not led to diminished elephant populations, and that calling the current situation a disaster is likely to scare off tourists, according to the Standard newspaper.

In an interview with the Standard, a retired KWS game warder listed staffing issues, poor leadership and resource constraints as reasons for the KWS anti-poaching unit’s lack of success. He argued that instead of indulging the tendency of the Kenyan government to “argue about carcasses”, it would be more productive to identify where improvements can be made and direct resources towards those improvements.

One of the improvements is the penalties imposed on those guilty of elephant poaching.

Until recently, Kenyan judges paid lip service to the penalties for those found guilty of wildlife crimes. The law stated that they could face a KES40,000 (R4,500) fine and/or 10 years’ imprisonment; but, according to a Wildlife Direct study, only 7% of those convicted of elephant and rhino-related crimes actually served prison time between 2008 and 2013.

Promisingly perhaps, in early 2014 Kenya drastically overhauled its wildlife law enacting far stiffer penalties for offenders. A person involved in the killing of an African elephant can now face life imprisonment or a fine of KES20 million (R2.5 million). The first conviction under this new law occurred in January this year, where a Chinese ivory smuggler was ordered to pay KES20 million or face seven years’ imprisonment.

It’s a positive development, but there is still much more that Kenyan authorities could be doing. Feizal Ali Mohamed, a Mombasa-based businessman and alleged ivory kingpin, has evaded Kenyan police since the beginning of June after an arrest warrant was issued for his role in smuggling ivory. The country’s Director of Public Prosecutions has asked the police for an explanation for their inaction and Mohamed still remains at large.

In neighbouring Tanzania, the situation is equally gloomy. Half of the country’s elephant population has been lost in the last five years and a third of all ivory seized in Asia comes from the country. Between 1982 and 2013 the elephant population in the Selous Game Reserve in the south of Tanzania dropped from 100,000 to 13,000. At this rate, it’s estimated that Tanzania’s elephant population will be extinct by 2020.

The overwhelming scale of this problem is exacerbated by accusations of complicity by Tanzanian government officials in elephant poaching. The chairman of the Tanzanian Parliamentary Committee on Land, Natural Resources and Environment, James Lembeli, has claimed that senior government officials in departments responsible for wildlife conservation are directly involved in poaching activities. This, Lembeli argues, is why anti-poaching campaigns in the country have so far been ineffective.

In response to international pressure, Tanzania committed earlier this year to “place beyond economic use” its stockpile of ivory, valued at approximately US$50 million, but has yet to do so and has offered no explanation as to why it has not, casting doubt on the country’s commitment.

More promising, however, is that by 2015, the Tanzanian Wildlife Authority, the organisation responsible for the safety and well-being of its wildlife, will operate independently of Tanzanian government’s red tape, bureaucracy and alleged corruption.

While Kenya and Tanzania show modest signs of hope, the successes in Chad and Botswana demonstrate to us that far more needs to be done by these governments if they hope to put an end to the decimation their elephants. What’s needed is proper political commitment from the Kenyan and Tanzanian governments, to ensure that their law enforcement and judicial authorities implement the law without fear or favour – but one hopes that by these countries finally realise this, it will not already be too late.

Chinese Delegation Reportedly Bought So Much Illegal Ivory on Africa Trip the Price Doubled

By Elliot Hannon
NOV. 5 2014

China has long been accused of fueling the illegal ivory trade in Africa. A new report out this week from London-based NGO Environmental Investigation Agency says the illicit trade implicates even the highest levels of the Chinese government. The organization’s report focuses on Tanzania, the epicenter of the illicit ivory trade, where the elephant population has been decimated with some 10,000 elephants killed for their tusks last year alone.

In March 2013, Chinese President Xi Jinping made a visit to the country on state business. The presidential visit, as the New York Times reports, kicked off a shopping spree for illegal ivory by the Chinese delegation that caused the price of the smuggled goods to double. Here’s more on what happened from the Times:

[President Xi Jinping] was joined by a large entourage of Chinese government officials and business leaders, officially there to promote a mutually beneficial relationship between the two countries. But according to a new report by the Environmental Investigation Agency, a nongovernmental organization based in London, members of the delegation used Mr. Xi’s visit as an opportunity to procure so much illegal ivory that local prices doubled to $70,000 per kilogram, or about $31,800 per pound. In fact, two weeks before Mr. Xi arrived, Chinese buyers went on a shopping spree for illegal ivory, purchasing thousands of pounds of poached tusks, which were “later sent to China in diplomatic bags on the presidential plane,” says the report, “Vanishing Point: Criminality, Corruption and the Devastation of Tanzania’s Elephants,” which was released on Thursday…
At a time when the Chinese government is trying to prove itself a responsible state actor that is serious about rooting out corruption and abiding by international law, the organization’s report describes a devastating environmental cost of China’s geopolitical rise: Chinese diplomats and military personnel, it says, are colluding with corrupt Tanzanian officials and Chinese-led crime syndicates that send huge amounts of illegal ivory to China, reducing Tanzania’s elephant population by half.

Hmmm..... so what's really new about corruption in Africa

Tell The Truth: Conservationists tell Tanzania Government Mouthpieces
BY PROF. DR. WOLFGANG H. THOME, ETN AFRICA CORRESPONDENT | NOV 09, 2014

Regular conservation sources from Tanzania and the wider region minced no words when Tanzanian officials, clearly stung by the tsunami of public disgust coming their way after the revelations of the Environmental Investigation Agency entered the public domain a few days ago, attempted to deny the allegations made in the report.

‘They are playing the same old cassette and it is not new. There was a time when the same people denied there even was a problem with poaching, until the opposition in parliament exposed the lies and the game counts last year put concrete figures on the table. You just have to ask yourself what happened to Kagesheki’s list of 300 names and why no prosecutions have been instituted. No sooner had he handed the list to his boss was he out of the job. Kikwete will go down in history as the president in charge of the country at a time when nearly two thirds of Tanzania’s elephants were butchered. And believe me, in a country which is run with the methods they use against the opposition and against journalists, they were definitely aware of what was going on. Only such public lashings like when the Daily Mail exposed those schemes and fearing a political disaster ahead of the Wildlife Crimes conference in London did they reluctantly admit that there was a huge problem with poaching. Until that moment they even still tried for permission from CITES to sell a hundred tons of blood ivory. That government has lost its credibility and as far as conservation is concerned its legitimacy. They should stop lying to the world because those lies will come back to haunt them’ let a regular source from Arusha fly, understandably on condition of anonymity.

‘There were too many scandals, the export of life animals to Qatar just one of them. And of course not a word about the attempt by a Chinese man to sneak a lot of ivory into port when the Chinese navy was visiting. I find the entire charade of denials disgusting’ contributed another source, before adding ‘And by the way the opposition in parliament has concluded the same that the statements made are a smokescreen and that instead of throwing mud at the investigators the government should investigate the allegations. But of course that is not happening or otherwise would the infamous list of 300 have caused prosecutions. Believe what you want but I chose to believe the EIA report because our government has no credibility in these matters left’.

Given other problems with projects riding roughshod over environmental concerns, like the proposed Serengeti Highway, the planned soda ash plant in the Lake Natron mudflats, the only breeding ground for the East African flamingos, the Uranium mining in the Selous, plans to build a dam and hydroelectric power plant at Stieglers’ Gorge, also in the Selous and plans for a deep sea port in the very centre of the Coelacanth marine park near Tanga, among others, has the Tanzanian government much to answer for.

‘Let’s not fool ourselves about the negative impact of such projects. Conservationists are not anti-development, but they want development in areas where it can be sustained and with the least impact on our environment. This government has a tendency to brush aside such considerations and is prepared to ignore environmental concerns and consequences for short lived profit. That is not acceptable in this day and age and no amount of trying will greenwash any of these projects. Their impacts are known and if for instance that highway would ever go ahead, the international conservation groups will not hesitate and decampaign our country. And for the Stieglers’ Gorge project they are dealing with a company found guilty of corruption back home in Brazil, what does that tell you? Tourism is very important for our economy and we should not risk it so casually’ wrote another source.

Fact is that the report by the Environmental Investigation Agency has stirred the hornets’ nest big time and will pit those who believe the report’s integrity against those who will try to deny the substance of it and the allegations made. Watch the relevant media in coming days and weeks how this will play out and who will ultimately be right and wrong in this latest battle to save Africa’s elephants and kill the blood ivory trade.

http://www.eturbonews.com/52372/tell-tr ... outhpieces

I wonder if it's going to be different in SA once they have polished off the elephant up there?

And they will come, no doubt...

They will come south, if nobody stops them

Uganda: First fallout of lost ivory

BY PROF. WOLFGANG H. THOME, PH.D., ETN AFRICA CORRESPONDENT | NOV 18, 2014



A recent routine audit into the contents of the strong rooms at the Uganda Wildlife Authority (UWA) has led to a mystery involving lost ivory.

Some 1.35 tons of ivory is missing, valued in excess of US$1 million.

Investigations are now ongoing, and while it cannot be ruled out that an accounting error could have led to this result, it seems more likely that the ivory was actually stolen as has been suggested by senior government officials, including President Museveni and the American Ambassador to Uganda, in his address a week ago to the delegates of the Africa Travel Association Congress.

To pave the way for the unfolding investigations, UWA has now suspended at least five officials, among them security intelligence officers and the Chief Warden and others with direct access to the vaults.

UWA’s Executive Director Dr. Andrew Seguya in fact cut short an official trip abroad to return home and be at hand to direct internal investigations at UWA while the Uganda police and other security organizations are equally now involved to find those involved and return the missing ivory. The recently set-up special regional desk by Interpol has also been brought into the investigation to widen the search for suspects and to track the ivory down should part or all of it begin to surface somewhere.

Uganda has in the past been fingered as a country of growing importance for transiting blood ivory from countries beyond to the port of Mombasa, but poaching in Uganda’s national parks has been relatively low volume – often being of subsistence in nature to feed on – compared to for instance Tanzania, where a wholesome slaughter of elephant populations has cost tens of thousands of elephant their lives over the past several years. Poaching has, however, taken an upward trend of late, and UWA has taken steps to increase the number of intelligence officers deployed in the field to gather information from locals around potential hotspots and then either prevent poaching incidents or else bring those involved to justice.

Putting the squeeze on Mozambique to stop elephant slaughter



In the dead of night a group of men hack the meat from a corpse using rusted machetes and pocket knives. Together they’re like a machine systematically tearing flesh from bone, slashing and sawing with blunted instruments. By morning all that’s left for the vultures are stalactites of flesh that cling stubbornly to the ribcage, which gapes like a maw where the heart and lifeblood of the elephant once pulsed.

The slaughter is documented in a series of grisly photos that emerged from the northern Mozambican game reserves of Quirimbas National Park and Niassa National Reserve in October this year. They highlight the routine slaughter of elephants in that area – on a scale that is now being referred to as “industrialized”. Estacios Valoi of the Oxpeckers Centre for Investigative Journalism took the images and reported that within 48 hours five elephants had been massacred in the Quirimbas National Park. Their tusks were the first thing to go, axed from the skull and immediately delivered to clients. In this instance the villagers also took the meat, but often the carcasses are simply left to rot. In a year-long investigation, started in November last year and supported by photographic and documentary evidence, Oxpecker’s Estacios Valoi revealed how a number of administrative, judicial and tax authorities in Cabo Delgado and Niassa provinces were complicit with the poaching syndicates, enabling poachers to gain access to weapons and protected areas and turning a blind eye to ivory and other illegal goods being smuggled through Mozambican ports, airports and borders.

His report reads: “… documents show that, despite the laws, officials are facilitating these crimes. Some sell weapons and ammunition, military uniforms and boots, and others expedite the release of detainees and make evidence disappear. The investigation discovered 15 cases involving armed poachers in the Quirimbas National Park, from between 2009 and 2013, which were forwarded to the criminal investigation police, the prosecuting attorney and the provincial court – with no outcome. Even some poachers who had been brazenly walking around with AK-47s were released.”

The report goes on to tell how a “deposit” of 15 000 meticais can allegedly secure a poachers release from prison and how the district administrator of the Cabo Delgado province, Ancuabe Eusébia Celestino, and the chief secretary of the village of Muaja, Horace Radio, arm poachers with weapons to cull “problem” elephants around the Quirimbas National Park. This despite the fact that they have no authority to kill animals – so called “problem” animals must be dealt with by the provincial department of agriculture.

In September this year environmentalists warned that between 1 500 and 1 800 elephants in northern Mozambique are being poached per year. According to the Worldwide Fund for Nature (WWF) Niassa’s elephant population was reduced from 20 374 in 2009 to less than 13 000 in 2013. In the Quirimbas National Park, the elephant population is now estimated at about 790 elephants. Mozambique is one of Africa’s main transit hubs for the trafficking of ivory to Asian markets – a great deal of which is shipped out through the northern region’s main port, Pemba.

The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (Cites) has previously criticized Mozambique for being one of the world’s worst failures in combating poaching. In 2013 the country, together with Vietnam, was ordered to come up with an action plan to substantially increase its efforts against poaching and illegal ivory trade or face tough international trade sanctions.

Although it was late to respond to Cites’ call, Mozambique has thus far managed to escape sanctions through a number of superficial measures. It has passed draft legislation that will, in theory, increase penalties against poachers. Whereas in the past poachers were slapped with a small fine they could now face prison sentences of between eight and 12 years, and fines of between $4 425 and $88 500. The draft, however, still needs to leap the hurdles of bureaucracy before it is passed into law. Given Mozambique’s record of poor implementation at a judicial level, it remains to be seen how effective the law will be in terms of actual prosecution. In 2013, for example, Mozambique showed a considerable increase in the number of fines issued for poaching related crimes, yet less than 3% of those fines were ever paid.

In April this year Mozambique signed a memorandum of understanding with South Africa in which the two parties agreed to strengthen relations to enhance the protection of endangered species. Part of the agreement was to adhere to Cites and other relevant international, regional and sub-regional conventions and protocols. The terms remain vague, however, and an implementation agreement has yet to be signed.

Most recently Mozambique forged an agreement with South Africa which supports the development of dedicated anti-poaching operations in and around Limpopo National Park, which joins the northern part of Kruger to form the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park and Conservation Area.

On the surface, Mozambique has recently made a great commitment in the war against poaching, but on the ground nothing has changed and the drafts and agreements serve as mere bluster to hold international sanctions at bay. This is particularly evident in the north of Mozambique where the systematic slaughter of elephants continues, aided and, in cases, instigated by government officials who claim to be protecting them.

Although the bloodied corpses that litter the parks are a world away from conference centers and international conventions where politicians and environmentalists deliberate over the future of threatened species it is exactly these spaces that will determine the future of Africa’s threatened wildlife, but only by forcing change through increased international pressure. The Environmental Investigation Agency and the International Rhino Foundation have petitioned the Obama government to take action against Mozambique under the Pelly amendment – which authorizes the US to impose sanctions on any country that contravenes an international conservation agreement. In this case the Cites agreements.

Although it has paid lip service to Cites, Mozambique has effectively cocked a snoot at the international community by dragging its heels and failing to take measures to halt poaching. For starters conviction of a few known key players would go a long way towards sending the right message to corrupt officials and businessmen. In the long run, however, it’s only dedicated policing and law enforcement that can change the situation in the parks. International diplomacy hasn’t worked – while Mozambique dawdles, animals die. It is only through tough measures, such as trade sanctions and increased international pressure that Mozambique will be forced to take action to protect its elephants.