p><span style="display:block;text-align:center;clear:both"> https://www.techtimes.com/articles/4589/20140320/narwhal-tusk-scientists-finally-solve-real-purpose.htm </span>African and Asian elephants. Ivory has been traded for a whole bunch of years by folks in Africa and Asia, resulting in restrictions and bans. Ivory was formerly used to make piano keys and different decorative gadgets due to the white colour it presents when processed however the piano trade abandoned ivory as a key protecting material within the 1980s in favor of different materials corresponding to plastic. Additionally, artificial ivory has been developed which can be utilized as a substitute material for making piano keys. Elephant ivory has been exported from Africa and Asia for millennia with records going back to the 14th century BCE. Transport of the heavy commodity was all the time tough, and with the institution of the early-modern slave trades from East and West Africa, freshly captured slaves have been used to hold the heavy tusks to the ports the place both the tusks and their carriers have been sold. The ivory was used for piano keys, billiard balls and other expressions of exotic wealth. On the peak of the ivory commerce, pre-20th century, in the course of the colonization of Africa, around 800 to 1,000 tonnes of ivory were despatched to Europe alone yearly. World wars and the next economic depressions triggered a lull on this luxurious commodity, however increased prosperity within the early 1970s saw a resurgence. Japan, relieved from its change restrictions imposed after World War II, started to purchase up raw (unworked) ivory. This started to place strain on the forest elephants of Africa and Asia, each of which had been used to provide the onerous ivory preferred by the Japanese for the manufacturing of hanko, identify seal stamps used like a signature. Previous to this period, most title seals had been made from wood with an ivory tip, carved with the signature, but elevated prosperity noticed the previously unseen solid ivory hanko in mass production. Softer ivory from East Africa and southern Africa was traded for souvenirs, jewellery and trinkets. By the 1970s, Japan consumed about 40% of the worldwide commerce; one other 40% was consumed by Europe and North America, usually worked in Hong Kong, which was the largest trade hub, with most of the rest remaining in Africa. China, but to become the economic force of right now, consumed small amounts of ivory to keep its skilled carvers in enterprise. In 1979, the African elephant population was estimated to be around 1.Three million in 37 range states, but by 1989, solely 600,000 remained. Although many ivory traders repeatedly claimed that the problem was habitat loss, it grew to become glaringly clear that the threat was primarily the international ivory commerce. Throughout this decade, round 75,000 African elephants had been killed for the ivory trade yearly, value round 1 billion dollars. About 80% of this was estimated to come from illegally killed elephants. The international deliberations over the measures required to forestall the serious decline in elephant numbers virtually at all times ignored the loss of human life in Africa, the fueling of corruption, the "currency" of ivory in buying arms, and the breakdown of regulation and order in areas the place illegal ivory trade flourished. The controversy often rested on the numbers of elephants, estimates of poached elephants and official ivory statistics. Activists reminiscent of Jim Nyamu have described present ivory prices for poached ivory and the dangers such activists face from organized poaching. Solutions to the issue of poaching and unlawful trade focused on making an attempt to regulate international ivory movements by way of CITES (Convention on Worldwide Commerce in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora). Although poaching stays a concern in areas of Africa, it isn't the one threat for the elephants who roam its wilderness. Fences in farmlands are becoming more and more more frequent; this disrupts the elephants' migration patterns and can cause herds to separate. Some CITES events (member states), led by Zimbabwe, stated that wildlife needed to have financial value attached to it to survive and that local communities wanted to be concerned. Ivory was extensively accepted by way of non-lethal use of wildlife, however a debate raged over lethal use as within the case of the ivory commerce. CITES officials and local bands of poachers erupted in violent struggle, killing men and women on every facet. It was recognised that the "sustainable lethal use of wildlife" argument was in jeopardy if the ivory trade couldn't be controlled. In 1986, CITES introduced a brand new control system involving CITES paper permits, registration of big ivory stockpiles and monitoring of legal ivory movements. These controls have been supported by most CITES events as nicely because the ivory trade and the established conservation movement represented by World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF), Traffic and the Worldwide Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). In 1986 and 1987, CITES registered 89.5 and 297 tonnes of ivory in Burundi and Singapore respectively. Burundi had one recognized dwell wild elephant and Singapore had none. The stockpiles were recognized to have largely come from poached elephants. The CITES Secretariat was later admonished by the US delegate for redefining the time period "registration" as "amnesty". The results of this was realised in undercover investigations by the Environmental Investigation Agency (EIA), a small NGO with few resources, when they met with traders in Hong Kong. Large parts of the stockpiles were owned by worldwide criminals behind the poaching and illegal worldwide commerce. Well-recognized Hong Kong-primarily based traders corresponding to Wang and Poon were beneficiaries of the amnesty, and elephant expert Iain Douglas-Hamilton commented on the Burundi amnesty that it "made not less than two millionaires". EIA confirmed with their investigations that not solely had these syndicates made monumental wealth, however additionally they possessed huge quantities of CITES permits with which they continued to smuggle new ivory, which if stopped by customs, they produced the paper permit. CITES had created a system which elevated the value of ivory on the worldwide market, rewarded worldwide smugglers and gave them the flexibility to regulate the trade and proceed smuggling new ivory. Additional failures of this "control" system had been uncovered by the EIA after they gained undercover access and filmed ivory carving factories run by Hong Kong traders, together with Poon, in the United Arab Emirates. Additionally they collected official commerce statistics, airway bills and additional proof in UAE, Singapore and Hong Kong. The UAE statistics showed that this country alone had imported over 200 tonnes of uncooked and merely ready ivory in 1987/88. Virtually half of this had come from Tanzania the place they had a whole ban on ivory. It underlined that the ivory traders rewarded by CITES with the amnesties had been running rings across the system. Despite these public revelations by the EIA, and adopted by media exposures (including ITV's The Cook Report) and appeals from African countries and a range of properly-revered organisations around the world, WWF only got here out in assist of a ban in mid-1989, indicating the significance of the "lethal use" principle of wildlife to WWF and CITES; even then, the group tried to water down decisions at the October 1989 assembly of CITES. Tanzania, attempting to break down the ivory syndicates that it recognized had been corrupting its society, proposed an Appendix One listing for the African Elephant (effectively a ban on worldwide commerce). Some southern African nations including South Africa and Zimbabwe have been vehemently opposed. They claimed that their elephant populations were properly managed and they wanted income from ivory sales to fund conservation. Though both nations had been implicated as entrepôts in unlawful ivory from other African countries, WWF, with sturdy ties to each international locations, discovered itself in a troublesome position. It's effectively documented that publicly it opposed the trade however privately tried to appease these southern African states. However, the so-referred to as Somalia-Proposal, offered by the governmental delegation of the Republic of Somalia, of which nature protection specialist Prof. Julian Bauer was an official member, then broke the stalemate and the elephant moratorium with its ban of elephant ivory commerce was adopted by the CITES delegates. Lastly at that October meeting of CITES after heated debates, the African elephant was put on Appendix One in all CITES, and three months later in January 1990 when the choice was enacted, the international trade in ivory was banned. It is extensively accepted that the ivory ban worked. The poaching epidemic that had hit so much of the African elephants' vary was greatly decreased. Ivory costs plummeted and ivory markets all over the world closed, nearly all of which were in Europe and the US. It has been reported that it was not merely the act of the Appendix One itemizing and various national bans associated with it, but the enormous publicity surrounding the problem prior to the choice and afterwards, that created a broadly accepted notion that the commerce was dangerous and now unlawful. Richard Leakey said that stockpiles remained unclaimed in Kenya and it turned cheaper and easier for authorities to regulate the killing of elephants. All through the talk which led to the 1990 ivory ban, a gaggle of southern African international locations supported Hong Kong and Japanese ivory traders to maintain trade. This was acknowledged to be as a result of these countries claimed to have effectively-managed elephant populations and so they needed the income from ivory sales to fund conservation. These nations had been South Africa, Zimbabwe, Botswana, Namibia and Swaziland. They voted towards the Appendix One listing and actively labored to reverse the decision. The two international locations main the try to overturn the ban immediately after it was agreed have been South Africa and Zimbabwe. South Africa's claim that its elephants had been nicely managed was not seriously challenged. Nevertheless, its position within the unlawful ivory trade and slaughter of elephants in neighbouring nations was exposed in quite a few news articles of the time, as a part of its coverage of destabilisation of its neighbours. South African Defence Pressure (SADF) which trained, equipped and outfitted the rebel Mozambique military RENAMO. RENAMO was closely implicated in giant-scale ivory poaching to finance its military. Zimbabwe had embraced "sustainable" use policies of its wildlife, seen by some governments and the WWF as a pattern for future conservation. Conservationists and biologists hailed Zimbabwe's Communal Areas Administration Programme for Indigenous Assets (CAMPFIRE) as a template for neighborhood empowerment in conservation. The failure to prevent the Appendix One itemizing by CITES got here as a blow to this movement. Zimbabwe may have made the profession of some biologists, however it was not sincere with its claims. The federal government argued the ivory trade would fund conservation efforts, however revenues had been as a substitute returned to the central treasury. Its elephant census was accused of double counting elephants crossing its border with Botswana by constructing artificial waterholes. The ivory commerce was additionally wildly out of control within its borders, with Zimbabwe National Army (ZNA) involvement in poaching in Gonarezhou National Park and different areas. Extra sinister was the alleged murder of a string of whistle-blowers, including a Capt. Nleya, who claimed the ZNA was involved in rhinoceros and elephant poaching in Mozambique. Nleya was discovered hanged at his military barracks close to Hwange National Park. The dying was reported as suicide by the military, however declared a murder by a magistrate. Nleya's widow was reportedly later threatened by anonymous telephone calls. The dispute over the ivory trade includes opposing units of perceived nationwide pursuits. The debate is additional complicated by the various educational and policy disciplines at play, together with biology, census strategies, economics, international trade dynamics, battle decision, and criminology-all reported to CITES delegates representing over 170 international locations. The selections made inside this agreement have often been highly political. Inevitably, it attracts misinformation, skulduggery and crime. The southern African nations continue to attempt to sell ivory by way of authorized methods. In an enchantment to beat nationwide interests, a gaggle of eminent elephant scientists responded with an open letter in 2002 which clearly explained the consequences of the ivory trade on other countries. They said that the proposals for renewed trade from southern Africa did not bear comparability with most of Africa because they had been based mostly on a South African model where 90% of the elephant inhabitants lived in a fenced National Park. They went on to describe South Africa's wealth and capacity to implement the legislation within these boundaries. By comparison, they made it clear that the majority elephants in Africa reside in poorly protected and unfenced bush or forest. They finished their enchantment by describing the poaching crisis of the 1980s, and emphasized that the decision to ban ivory was not made to punish southern African nations, however to avoid wasting the elephants in the rest of the world. Southern African nations have continued to push for the international ivory commerce. Led by Zimbabwe's President Robert Mugabe, they'd some success by means of CITES. Mugabe himself had been accused of bartering tonnes of ivory for weapons with China, breaking his nation's commitment to CITES. On sixteen November 2017, it was introduced that US President Donald Trump had lifted a ban on ivory imports from Zimbabwe implemented by Barack Obama. The controversy surrounding ivory trade has usually been depicted as Africa versus the West. However, the southern Africans have all the time been in a minority within the African elephant range states. Utilizing standards that had been agreed upon on the 1989 CITES assembly, amongst a lot controversy and debate, in 1997 CITES events agreed to permit the populations of African elephants in Botswana, Namibia and Zimbabwe to be "downlisted" to Appendix Two which might permit worldwide trade in elephant parts. However, the decision was accompanied by "registering" stockpiles inside these international locations and inspecting commerce controls in any designated importing country. CITES once once more was making an attempt to arrange a control system. Forty-9 tonnes of ivory was registered in these three nations, and Japan's assertion that it had sufficient controls in place was accepted by CITES and the ivory was bought to Japanese traders in 1997 as an "experiment". In 2000, South Africa also "downlisted" its elephant inhabitants to CITES Appendix Two with a stated desire to sell its ivory stockpile. In the identical yr, CITES agreed to the establishment of two methods to tell its member states on the standing of illegal killing and commerce. The 2 programs, Monitoring the Illegal Killing of Elephants (MIKE) and Elephant Trade Information System (ETIS), have been highly criticised as a waste of cash for not with the ability to prove or disprove any causality between ivory stockpile sales and poaching ranges-maybe the most significant cause for his or her institution. They do pull collectively data on poaching and seizures as supplied by member states, though not all states provide comprehensive information. The impact of the sale of ivory to Japan in 2000 was hotly debated with Visitors, the group which compiled the ETIS and MIKE databases, claiming they couldn't decide any hyperlink. Nevertheless, many of those on the ground claimed that the sale had modified the perception of ivory, and lots of poachers and traders believed they were back in business. A seizing of over 6 tonnes of ivory in Singapore in 2002 provided a stark warning that poaching in Africa was not for under local markets, but that among the ivory syndicates from the 1980s have been operating once more. 532 elephant tusks and over 40,000 blank ivory hankos had been seized, and the EIA carried out investigations which confirmed that this case had been preceded by 19 different suspected ivory shipments, 4 destined for China and the remainder for Singapore, although usually en route to Japan. The ivory originated in Zambia and was collected in Malawi earlier than being containerized and shipped out of South Africa. Between March 1994 and may 1998, nine suspected shipments had been despatched by the same company Sheng Luck from Malawi to Singapore. After this, they began to be dispatched to China. Evaluation and cross-referencing revealed company names and firm directors already recognized to the EIA from investigations in the 1980s-the Hong Kong criminal ivory syndicates have been energetic once more. In 2002, another 60 tonnes of ivory from South Africa, Botswana and Namibia was permitted for sale, and in 2006, Japan was approved as a destination for the ivory. Japan's ivory controls had been severely questioned with 25% of traders not even registered, voluntary rather than legal requirement of traders, and illegal shipments entering Japan. Earlier than the sale happened, within the wings China was in search of approval as an ivory vacation spot nation. In 2014, Uganda stated that it was investigating the theft of about 3,000 lb (1,400 kg) of ivory from the vaults of its state-run wildlife protection agency. Poaching is acute in central Africa, which is said to have misplaced at the very least 60 percent of its elephants previously decade. Nevertheless, a CITES mission beneficial that CITES approve China's request, and this was supported by WWF and Visitors. China and Japan purchased 108 tonnes of ivory in one other "one-off" sale in November 2008 from Botswana, South Africa, Namibia and Zimbabwe. At the time, the concept was that these legal ivory sales might depress the price, thereby removing poaching stress, an idea supported by each Visitors and WWF. 2012, the demand for ivory has decreased consequently of recent consumer consciousness by way of education in regards to the connection between buying ivory and the killing of elephants. China's increased involvement in infrastructure projects in Africa and the purchase of pure resources has alarmed many conservationists who concern the extraction of wildlife physique components is growing. Since China was given "authorized buyer" status by CITES, the smuggling of ivory seems to have increased alarmingly. Chinese language nationals working in Africa have been caught smuggling ivory in lots of African nations, with at least ten arrested at Kenyan airports in 2009. In lots of African international locations, home markets have grown, offering easy access to ivory, though the Asian ivory syndicates are most destructive shopping for and delivery tonnes at a time. Contrary to the advice of CITES that costs could also be depressed, and those that supported the sale of stockpiles in 2008, the price of ivory in China has tremendously increased. It might even be because of the exploding number of Chinese ready to buy luxury goods. A research funded by Save the Elephants showed than the value of ivory tripled in China throughout 4 years following 2011 when stockpile destruction of ivory turned more common. The identical study concluded that this led to increased poaching. Primarily based on these findings, the research authors really useful action to each scale back demand for ivory in China and different important markets and to lower corruption and poverty in Africa. In 2012, The new York Times reported on a large upsurge in ivory poaching, with about 70% flowing to China. The ivory commerce has steadily been a reoccurring downside that dwindled down the inhabitants of the African elephants and the white rhino. In 2013, a single seizure in Guangzhou uncovered 1,913 tusks, the product of nearly 1,000 lifeless animals. In 2014, the Ugandan authorities had 1,355 kilograms (2,987 lb) of ivory saved in a protected and guarded by police and the army, stolen. At a worth of over $1.1 million, it is certainly a trigger for concern. This loss was discovered throughout an audit of the Uganda Wildlife Authority, which has led to an investigation of the ones who should have been safeguarded that quantity of ivory. As a result, five of the Wildlife Authority staffers have been suspended thus far. Main centers of ivory trafficking in Vietnam embrace Mong Cai, Hai Phong and Da Nang. Considered one of the most important traffickers of unlawful ivory from Togo is a Vietnamese, Dao Van Bien. A 22-month sentence was imposed. By way of retail trade of elephant ivory, Hong Kong is the most important market in the world, and has been criticised for fueling the slaughter of elephants to satisfy the demand of shoppers principally from mainland China. Ninety five kilograms (209 lb) of elephant ivory was confiscated at Charles de Gaulle Airport in Paris from two Vietnamese who had been arrested by French customs. The Philippines is a serious center of the ivory commerce with the Philippines priest Monsignor Cristobal Garcia implicated by Nationwide Geographic in a scandal over his involvement in the commerce. African elephants ivory has entered Thailand's Asian elephant ivory market. Huge amounts of ivory are still being imported by Japan. Vientiane, Laos, is a significant venue for Chinese language tourists looking to bypass Chinese language restrictions on the sale of ivory. The sale of ivory is done overtly, including at San Jiang Market, in the Golden Triangle Special Economic Zone, and in Luang Prabang Province. In 2018, a examine by Avaaz sponsored by Oxford College indicated that authorized antique ivory trading in the European Union continues to gasoline the poaching of elephants. It's believed that a authorized loophole that enables for the trading of old ivory masks the sale of objects made from ivory from extra just lately killed elephants. Claims of a link between terrorism and the ivory trade have been made by numerous public officials and media shops. NGO experiences cited an nameless source within the militant group Al-Shabaab who claimed that the group engaged within the trafficking of ivory. The claim that Al-Shabaab received as much as 40% of its funding from the sale of elephant ivory gained additional consideration following the 2013 Westgate buying mall attack in Nairobi, Kenya. However, a report published jointly by Interpol and the United Nations Atmosphere Programme described these claims as unreliable. In https://brusstrading.com/product/narwhal-tusk-for-sale/ with the report, Al-Shabaab's major revenue was from informal taxation and the commerce in charcoal, a major source of deforestation. It is feasible that some Somali poachers paid taxes to Al-Shabaab while smuggling ivory via their territory, representing only a small portion of the group's whole revenue. Somalia was a preferred place for illegal trade for it's house and financial support for a lot of terrorist teams. There are still laws in place that help the criminalization of poaching, however much like all illegal supplies, individuals will always find methods around it. Worldwide commerce in Asian elephant ivory was banned in 1975 when the Asian elephant was positioned on Appendix One of many Convention on the Worldwide Trade in Endangered Species (CITES). By the late 1980s, it was believed that only round 50,000 remained within the wild. There was little controversy in the decision to ban commerce in Asian elephant ivory. Nevertheless, the species remains to be threatened by the ivory commerce, and lots of conservationists have supported the African ivory commerce ban because evidence shows that ivory traders will not be involved whether or not their raw material is from Africa or Asia. Selections by CITES on ivory commerce affect Asian elephants. For intricate carving, Asian ivory is often most popular. One in all the principle considerations of the conference was specifically on reevaluating the measures already in place to protect African elephants and the unlawful trade of their ivory. While 46 nations signed this agreement, it was reported in 2015 by The Guardian that the elephant poaching disaster was still unimproved. On 6 October 2017, the UK government announced plans to ban the sales and exportation of ivory in areas of the United Kingdom. On 20 December 2018, the UK Ivory Act 2018, acquired Royal Assent after being passed by the British parliament. The Act may be extended to incorporate hippos, walruses, and narwhals sooner or later. The ban, when it comes into effect, has been described one of many "world's toughest" ivory bans and successfully bans the shopping for and promoting of all available form of ivory within the UK bar some slender exemptions. Russians, different Europeans, the Inuit, and the individuals of Greenland. In line with the United States government, Alaska natives (together with first nations, Inuit and Aleuts) are allowed to harvest walrus for subsistence as long because the harvesting shouldn't be wasteful. The natives are permitted to promote the ivory of the hunted walrus to non-natives so long as it's reported to a United States Fish and Wildlife Service representative, tagged and customary into some kind of handicraft. Natives may additionally sell ivory discovered within 0.25 miles (0.Forty km) of the ocean-often called seashore ivory- to non-natives if the ivory has been tagged and labored ultimately. Fossilized ivory is not regulated, and could be bought without registering, tagging or crafting in any means. In Greenland, previous to 1897, it was bought by the Royal Greenland Commerce Department solely for sale domestically. After that point, walrus ivory was exported. Walrus ivory was used to create items of artwork and particularly chess items in the Center Ages. Within the nineteenth century, Bering Strait Inuit traded, amongst different issues, walrus ivory to the Chinese language, for glass beads and iron goods. Previous to this, the Bering Strait Inuit used ivory for practical reasons; harpoon points, instruments, and so forth., however about the only time(s) walrus ivory was used otherwise, it was to make games for festivities, and for children's toys. Moscow is a serious hub for the trade in walrus ivory, providing the commodity for a big international market. The individuals of Greenland possible traded narwhal ivory amongst themselves previous to any contact with Europeans. For a whole lot of years since, the tusks have moved from Greenland to international markets. In the 1600s, the Dutch traded with the Inuit, sometimes for metallic items in change for narwhal tusks, seal skins, and different items. Trading continues immediately between Greenland and different international locations, with Denmark by far being the leading purchaser. There is a world export ban of narwhal tusks from 17 Nunavut communities imposed by the Canadian federal government. The Inuit traders in this region are challenging the ban by filing an utility with the Federal Courtroom. The Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans restricts the export of narwhal tusks and other related products from these communities, together with Iqaluit, the territorial capital. Tusks in good situation are valued at as much as $450 CAD per metre. The ban affects each carvings and raw tusks. The Canadian government has said that if it fails to limit export of narwhal tusks, then the worldwide group would possibly completely ban exports under CITES. Tusks are still allowed to be traded within Canada. The primary known instance of mammoth ivory reaching western Europe was in 1611, when a piece, purchased from Samoyeds in Siberia, reached London. After 1582, when Russia conquered Siberia, the ivory grew to become a more often obtainable commodity. Siberia's mammoth ivory business skilled substantial development from the mid-18th century on. In a single instance, in 1821, a collector introduced 8,165 kg (18,001 lb) of ivory, from approximately 50 mammoths, back from the brand new Siberian Islands. It's estimated that 46,750 mammoths have been excavated during the primary 250 years since Siberia turned part of Russia. In the early 19th century mammoth ivory was used, as substantial source, for such merchandise as piano keys, billiard balls, and ornamental boxes. In 1998, over 300 mammoth tusks were discovered in an underground ice cave within the Taimyr Peninsula in North Siberia. These fossils and tusks have been studied up to 2003, until 24 of them had been stolen and transported to Russia. The suspect was finally caught and arrested, however there was an excessive amount of harm performed to continue learning these mammoth tusks. Lavers, Chris (2009). The Pure History of Unicorns. USA: William Morris. pp. Kramer, Andrew E. (19 November 2008). "Trade in mammoth ivory, helped by world thaw, flourishes in Russia". The brand new York Instances. THE IVORY Trade. pp 7-11. A CONSULTANCY UNDERTAKEN FOR DR. IAIN DOUGLAS-HAMILTON ON BEHALF OF THE UNITED STATES FISH & WILDLIFE SERVICE OF THE Division OF THE Inside, AND THE Worldwide UNION FOR THE CONSERVATION OF NATURE AND Pure Resources, MORGE, SWITZERLAND. June 1979 I.S.C. Parker Wildlife Services Ltd P.O. B0X 30678 NAIROBI, Kenya. Kru, a West African individuals) Country is stuffed with ivory" the gist of this being that now slaves had been unlawful, ivory was tough to move." BENNETT, N.R. BROOKS J.R. 1965 New England merchants in Africa. Boston Univ. Press, Boston. New Scientist. Reed Business Info. Lemieux, A. M.; Clarke, R. V. (2009). "The Worldwide Ban on Ivory Gross sales and its Effects on Elephant Poaching in Africa". British Journal of Criminology. Forty nine (4): 451. doi:10.1093/bjc/azp030. New Scientist. Reed Business Data. Elevated Demand for Ivory Threatens Elephant Survival. Lifting the Ivory Ban Called Premature. Katy Payne, Cornell College; Iain Douglas-Hamilton, Save the Elephants; Vivek Menon, Wildlife Trust of India; Cynthia Moss, Amboseli Elephant Research Challenge; Joyce Poole, Savanna Elephant Vocalization Undertaking; Andrea Turkalo, Wildlife Conservation Society (31 October 2002). "Lifting the Ivory Ban Known as Premature - Scientists Supply a Perspective on Elephants and Ivory". The horror! The horror! African international locations set to lock horns over ivory Archived 21 August 2016 on the Wayback Machine. Mike And Etis Archived 19 February 2011 at the Wayback Machine. The brand new York Occasions. Ivory gross sales Archived 2 April 2013 on the Wayback Machine. Return of ivory trade as Britain backs China - Nature, Environment. Photograph Shuji Kajiyama, Related Press (10 December 2015). "How Japan is Fueling the Slaughter of Elephants". Schwartz, Michael (8 August 2014). "America's ongoing debate over the trade in ivory".</p>
![[PukiWiki]](image/pukiwiki.png "[PukiWiki]")
