The New York Times reported yesterday on the arrest of two New York jewelry dealers for selling illegally poached ivory. The illegal goods weighed more than a ton—equivalent to 100 dead elephants.
The case, brought by the Manhattan district attorney’s office, reflects an unsettling trend. Last year, some 24 tons of ivory was seized around the world — the product of an estimated 2,500 elephants — making it the worst year for elephant poaching since an international ban on commercial ivory trading began in 1989, according to Traffic, a wildlife trade monitoring network.
Much of the ivory being harvested by poachers leaves Africa through Kenya and Tanzania and is destined for China and Thailand, the network said.
From 2002 to 2006, 4 of every 10 dead elephants were killed by poachers, but today, poachers are responsible for 8 of 10 elephant deaths in Africa, where the animals are a threatened species, according to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, which the United States has signed.
Poaching of Asian elephants, which are an endangered species, is not as closely monitored.
The punishment for this? Unbelievably trivial!
But the law treats illegal ivory sales as a relatively minor felony, prosecutors said. As a result, neither man will receive a prison sentence. Under plea agreements, both agreed to pay fines and forfeit the ivory, some of which law enforcement officials said they would retain for training purposes. . .
Mr. [Mukesh] Gupta, who investigators said had more than $1 million in ivory on hand, agreed to $45,000 in fines and other payments. Mr. [Johnson Jung-Chien] Lu, whose illegal goods were valued at about $120,000, agreed to a $10,000 fine.
All of the money will go to the Wildlife Conservation Society, the Manhattan district attorney’s office said.
There will be no jail time for either. So that’s $55,000 in fines for 100 dead elephants. Is that all their lives are worth? I would mandate jail time—even a minimal amount—as a stronger deterrent.
Martha Stewart got 6 months in prison for allegedly lying to the feds. It’s not clear she did this and in any case I believe it’s the duty of every American to lie to the government.
They started it.
But certainly these men are evil. If there were no buyers, there would be no market. How about at least 2,000 hours of community service with a shovel in the local elephant cage at the zoo?
That’s only a year of full-time employment. And, at $10 / hour (we’re talking unskilled manual labor), that’s not even half the value of the fine Mr. Gupta agreed to.
Add a zero, and you’d get my attention.
b&
You’re calculating the value to the zoo, not the cost to Gupta. And if he’s busy at the zoo, he’ll have less free time to traffic in ivory.
While I have a big problem with prohibition on drugs, I would fully support extremely strong punishments for poaching and aggressive investigation and prosecution. Say, something on the order of a year in prison for each $10,000 in contraband inventory, and fines ten times that of the resale value of the contraband.
If you really need elephant ivory, establish a wildlife preserve for them and harvest the tusks of those who die of natural causes after living at least 60 years. After waiting a few decades for your initial population to mature, you’ll have a perpetual supply of ivory at the maximum long-term sustainable rate, and what more can you ask for?
b&
I agree, but would add that fear of being caught is shown to be a good crime deterrent, so as well as having punishments which are not so inconsequential, I would like to see improved monitoring. Restorative justice would be nice but I’m not sure what that would entail.
Take cops off the drug beat and put them on the poaching contraband beat. Swap the penalties between the two, too. Both problems (mostly) solved.
b&
I concur.
I like your idealistic scenario but perhaps people are too greedy? Maybe put the elephants to sleep, gently remove the tusks, then sell them in an international auction to support the animals? Maybe the same could be done for rhinos who are now shot by poachers, then have their horns savagely sawn off while they’re still alive.
I’d go for that if elephant tusks were the sort of thing that grew back in a season like deer antlers, or if they weren’t important to an elephant’s survival in the wild or quality of life in captivity. They use their tusks in combination with their trunks much the same way we use our thumbs, you see….
b&
Then have some frickin’ laser beams attached to their heads!
I believe that approach has been tried on rhinos (not sure where I read it though). I agree with Ben Goren though that for Elephants, removal of their tusks would probably adversely affect their natural behaviour too much.
It is of course highly offensive that we should evn have to consider mutilating elephants and rhinos to prevent a few greedy people from killing them for profit.
Tusks continuously grow, and they don’t get ground down in captivity as quickly as in the wild, so zoos have to keep them trimmed. And apparently they have to destroy the ivory since selling it is illegal.
Public stocks. Outside a PETA convention.
Or else behind bars – at a zoo.
If only it weren’t for that pesky Eighth Amendment….
b&
Indeed. Wouldn’t it be nice if they could be tried by a jury of elephants?
Are you kidding? It’s those same Republicans who got us into this mess in the first place — and you want them to be the whole jury?
b&
Judges determine the fine level quite acceptable as the poachers were not morally culpable having no free will in the matter…
I know your comment is intended to be ironic, but I’m going to respond seriously. The question of free will, whether it exists and what it is, doesn’t really need to be considered in order to determine what forms of punishment, or remedial action, will be effective at reducing criminal behavior. Sure, that debate/research will inform us on devising systems to try, and on the ethics, but first we need to figure out what works. And for that we have to apply the only methodology so far devised that results in useful information about reality. We need to observe, compose hypotheses, devise tests/experiments, analyze results. And then employ methods of punishment and or remedial action that follow the data.
That kind of thing has never been done in a large scale systematic way that I know of. To me it seems like something worthy of a Manhattan Project type effort because it could so drastically change our culture for the better. Won’t happen anytime soon though.
I do think it is obvious that the penalties these two poached ivory dealers have received won’t have any effect on reducing the slaughter of elephants by poachers, or the willingness of dealers to deal in exotic animal parts. Maybe a year or two of working with a park service in Africa monitoring and caring for the animals, and protecting them from poachers, would be somewhat effective as one component in rehabilitating such people.
I fully support a law which would provide mandatory life imprisonment without possibility of parole for this scum who deal in ivory or whale or dolphin meat or shark fins or who capture Great Apes. (I also think that the US Navy should roam the waters and sink every whaling vessel it can find. When the last of those bastards hit the sea floor, that would be a great day.)
Let’s not lose sight of the fact that in Kenya, under Richard Leakey’s direction, the anti-poaching forces are armed and have permission to shoot poachers on sight.
Getting caught poaching in Kenya is an instant capital offense.
Does that at all balance the light punishment for selling the ivory on the other side of the world?
Not unless getting caught selling ivory on the other side of the world gets one extradited to Kenya and charged with poaching. (or sentenced to having antlers strapped to their heads and sent into the bush to flush out more poachers)
Arguably the dealers on the other side of the world should be more severely punished than the poachers. The poachers are just trying to augment an often destitute existence and would do whatever to make a little money. The dealers are the ones that make the real money and directly encourage demand for the product. So I’d have to say no, no balance.
Yes I strongly agree. To stop the trade it’s necessary to hit the traders at the big money end of the supply chain.
It’s the demand for ivory that fuels the trade of course so we also need to stigmatise the wearing of ivory jewellery and displaying of ivory knick knacks.
Can’t we just educate the Chinese that elephant tusks don’t work as penis enlarger? Kill the market right there.
That would be great but if there is one thing more intransigent then religious belief, that thing is male penis angst.
Hmmm…I think we need to take it one step further.
Fresh-roasted elephant poacher penis is the world’s ultimate aphrodisiac. For maximum effect, only the end half of the penis must be slow-roasted with a blow torch while it’s still attached to the living poacher, and then the whole penis must be sliced off at the base. And then served with a side of fava beans and a nice chianti.
Yessiree Bob, you heard it here first: the finest aphrodisiac known to man. Get ’em while they last, because after that you’re left with filleted tiger poacher penis, which we all know is second-best (but still quite effective, of course).
Cheers,
b&
+1
What is the market for elephant ivory? Is it really all for Chinese sexual remedies?
I don’t understand why in the hell anyone else would buy it. Are there really die hard piano players who say they just must have it for keys? Must have it for jewelry?
Any links? . . . I read wikipedia and was unsatisfied.
As far as I know, it’s collected primarily as a status symbol: it’s basically saying “I’m so fucking rich that I own a knickknack crafted from real elephant ivory.”
Unlike many other animal body parts that are subject to illegal harvesting, I’ve never heard of ivory (from any species) being used as a medicinal component.
What is the legislation like with antique ivory products?
And what are the moral implications of buying something made in the 18th C. with some ivory parts? I ask because one of the best baroque flutes I have played has some ivory parts in it, and I just can’t decide whether or not it is ok to buy it. On the one hand I can understand that I shouldn’t; on the other hand local laws don’t prohibit buying antiques with ivory in it, and it is a really good instrument. Any moral help to be found here?
Buying ivory products now regardless when it was made creates a market for ivory.
That’s the case for things like trinkets and jewelry, but the only market at play here is three-hundred-year-old museum-piece musical instruments. I very much doubt an ivory collector would be interested in this flute, whereas any flautist who specializes in Baroque music would be all over it in an instant, regardless of how much or how little ivory it has.
If it were a Renaissance-era lute with ivory fretboards, would you still think that buying and selling it contributed to the market for ivory? This flute is no different.
b&
There’s no “f” in “lute” … 😉
/@
Well, of course not. This is a cheese shop. Go to the luthier if you wanna buy an effin’ lute!
And, no — we’re all out of cheddar, Wensleydale, brie, jack, feta, reggiano, gruyere, and that horrid yellow plastic shit that Americans spray from cans. Sorry! Is there anything else I can interest you in?
b&
I certainly can’t offer you any legal advice, other than to suggest that you thoroughly investigate the matter and make sure that the instrument isn’t a modern reproduction with illegal ivory.
But I wouldn’t have any moral qualms. Not only is any damage long since done, but there’s no further benefit to those who committed the (not-then) crime, and no incentive for others to commit further similar crimes.
I’d also consider it morally worng to let a beautiful instrument languish on a shelf somewhere. Those things were meant to be played, and they damned well should be played. Assuming you don’t do anything stupid, no harm will come to the instrument, so any preservationist hesitancies are invalid as well.
So, make sure you won’t be setting yourself up for legal trouble, and then buy the flute and play some Bach!
Cheers,
b&
Thanks for the replies. Now I’m almost tempted to buy it. The problem is performing in countries where even antique ivory is forbidden. Maybe I’ll buy it, and change the ivory parts to white plastic (the ivory parts are just decorative and don’t affect the sound). But that then seems like destroying a genuine historical flute that is in uncommonly good condition for its age. Maybe in this case it really it is best to let this just be a museum piece. There are good modern instruments available also.
My advice? And request?
If it’s legal in your jurisdiction, buy it, play it, preserve it, and don’t take it to jurisdictions where it’s forbidden. If you do a lot of gigs in those sorts of places, get a modern replica; if not, borrow or rent one when you need to.
b&
That reminds me of “pollution fines” which some companies happily pay because there’s more money to be made by doing wrong.
The technical term is, “slap on the wrist.”
Fines must be sufficient to make business unprofitable in order to be effective. And that means the entire business — not just one particular transaction. Otherwise, the business will just include getting caught as an expense on the budget and carry on with business as usual.
b&
If the cost of the pollution is less than the value of what they’re making, then paying the fine is not doing wrong. If the fine doesn’t reflect the damage of the pollution, then it’s the responsibility of the government to increase it.
Hey, wasn’t there a news report a few years back that linked the sale of endangered species and/or their body parts to terrorist groups?
The punishment should be that the possessors of the ivory should have all their teeth pulled out with pliers…by an elephant, preferably.
In a similar situation, there’s been a lot in the news about rhino poaching here in South Africa, because the number being killed has jumped so dramatically this year. I think both need to be addressed the same way, which I have also mentioned before in a blog post: http://evidenceandreason.wordpress.com/2012/05/08/rhinos-need-evidence-based-thinking/
While it’s good going after poachers they aren’t the problem and punishing them won’t help. They don’t kill rhinos or elephants because they like it, they kill them for money. If you remove some poachers more will replace them because the motivation exceeds any threat of punishment.
The only way to stop it will be to correct the thinking that horns or tusks have medicinal value. That requires not only that we show them there is no evidence for that, which has been done before, but that we encourage the acceptance of evidence-based thinking. That requires co-operation from the Asian countries though. Without that nothing will happen. It’ll be the same as trying to get evolution accepted while not doing anything about religion.
New York can hang its head in shame for many things, you can still get shark fin there too 🙁
http://www.sharksavers.org/en/blogs-news/shark-savers-blog/ny-shark-fin-bill-passes-the-assembly-but-senate-fails-to-vote/