Citing CITES

The ivory ban is frequently held up as a prime exhibit for CITES, which many conservationists consider a highly successful agreement. Elephant numbers have been rising by 4% a year in the well-protected populations of southern and east Africa, but in Central and West Africa no one knows what is going on. Some countries, such as Botswana, home to a quarter of the African total, and South Africa, now have so many elephants that they would like to shoot more of them (and have asked CITES, without success, for permission to sell more ivory).

In all, CITES bans trade in nearly 1,000 animal and plant species; trade in many more is limited by permits. The Interpol working group on wildlife crime said that there were clear signs that illegal trade was increasing. More frequent seizures, of larger volume, have been occurring. The increased seizures reflect larger, more frequent shipments by the sophisticated criminal gangs now involved in the trade.

If trade is on the rise, then the efficacy of trade bans as a conservation measure is at least debatable. To be sure, some bans have worked. Exports of wild birds from four of the five leading bird-exporting countries fell by more than two-thirds between the late 1980s and the late 1990a as a result of CITES-related trade measures, including an American import ban.

The temporary ban on the trade in the vicuña, a relative of the llama, and its wool is another success. Four South American countries imposed a trade ban in 1967; a CITES ban followed in 1975. Later CITES allowed trade in sheared wool on a permit basis. The population has risen to more than 250,000. The ban lasted long enough to give vicuñas time to recover.