OVERSEAS DEVELOPMENT ADMINISTRATION
Eland House, Stag Place, London SW1E 5DH
Telex: 263907/8 FAX: 01-273
Telephone: 01-273
or Switchboard: 01-273 3000
GTN: 273
Ian Muchmore Esq
Department of the Environment
Tollgate House
Houlton Street
BRISTOL
BS2 9DJ
Dear lon
Your ref
0396
233
Our ref AFP 001/466,001
Date
HKCISI ||
25 August 1989
Мобелень
fee
fla peal
A
Eft
29/8.
CITES AFRICAN ELEPHANT PROPOSALS
773
Your letter of 18 August to John Hughes sought comments from others on your draft submission to Mr Trippier. I am responding in Peter Rundell's absence on leave.
2. From CDA's point of view the draft is basically fine. But I think some mention needs to be made of the fact that occasional murmerings about compensation are heard from southern African countries, should a world wide ban be imposed, and that (in ODA's view) this would be a poor use of funds, difficult to justify economically. I suggest the following insertion into your paragraph 2 after "...game areas.
2
3.
-
If a worldwide ban is imposed, southern African governments may seek compensation from the protaganists for lost income. They should be discouraged from this idea as it makes no sense economically. At best it could only be a short term solution governments would ultimately have to find alternative sources of income, for what would be a long term loss. An example might be for surplus elephants to be exported to East African countries to replace depleted herds. This would be easier to justify in economic terms, as tourism is likely to benefit, and aid donors might be more amenable to provide funds."
Some minor points.
Para 1, second sentence. Insert "If agreed" before "this would result....
Para 2, Fifth sentence. It is misleading to imply that foreign exchange
helps fund wildlife management. In truth foreign exchange goes into central government coffers to fund imports (and thank you very much!) whereas wildlife management depends almost totally on local funds. We should, I think, try to make this clearer.