22 



are saying they need to use this resource and particularly the 

 stockpiles of the resource. They come periodicf.lly to make their 

 case. 



AWF's symbol is the elephant and our members would clearly 

 rather have elephants on the hoof than any other way. The prob- 

 lem we have is whether you can open up a commercial trade in 

 ivory, even a limited commercial trade, without causing an out- 

 break of poaching elsewhere on the Continent? What turned things 

 around at the CITES meeting 2 years ago when South Africa pro- 

 posed a very limited trade? And South Africa was talking not even 

 of a trade in ivory, they were talking about a trade in meat and 

 hides and nobody poaches an elephant for its hide, so it was a very, 

 very narrow exception. Yet, the governments in Tanzania and 

 Uganda and Kenya said, "Just even the hint that we are going to 

 re-open commercial trade in any way is going to be sufficient for 

 us to start losing the elephants outside the protected areas because 

 of the mere hint of opening up commercial trade." 



And the problem you have is an enormously valuable resource 

 that is out in the landscape. How do you protect it? And the com- 

 ment somebody made, this is not just an African problem. If the 

 deer in Scotland all had hundred dollar bills on their antlers run- 

 ning around, how many deer would there be in Scotland? 



So, I mean, this is the dilemma that we are in and I am very 

 sympathetic to the Zimbabwean position because they have done a 

 good job and yet the view we have had to take is we simply cannot 

 lose the elephants in three-quarters of the Continent to help them 

 off the hook. It is a problem. 



They are still allowed to do trophy hunting, which is not gen- 

 erally that well known. It seems contradictory that, on the one 

 hand, you cannot have commercial trade but a hunter can go in 

 and shoot a trophy elephant. They make as much money from the 

 very small number of elephants killed for trophy hunting as they 

 did from the whole ivory trade at a commercial level. So, although 

 their money is half what it used to be, it is not insignificant. 



And there is no question that this is not causing a problem else- 

 where. And I think at the end of the day, our view would be, al- 

 though we do not like trophy hunting, that that is a legitimate use. 

 It is enormously valuable for communities and we can support 

 their continuing that exception. But I think we would probably 

 have to oppose the introduction of commercial trade unless we can 

 address the problems elsewhere on the Continent. 



That is kind of a roundabout answer, but it is not an easy issue. 



Mr. Payne. Right. Yes, I know that in Kenya about 2 or 3 years 

 ago, they had a burning of tusks. I think it was more of a P.R. 

 piece. They wanted to get some U.S. airplanes or something so they 

 were showing they were against poaching. 



Let me, since we are going to have to leave, let me ask Mr. Mills, 

 has there been any work done by the Sierra Club — at a recent 

 meeting of the European Parliament that was held here last week, 

 I raised the question of an oil boycott to the Dutch people who were 

 there, parliamentarians, and they indicated that they had raised 

 the issue in their country but it is not being raised very strongly. 

 And just similar to the timber issue with the French, they raised 

 it very quietly but no one seems to hear them. 



