TNAG-2133-FCO40-3048-Hong-Kong-and-the-ivory-trade-1990 — Page 155

FCO40 Hong Kong Department Records 聯邦事務部香港部檔案 All

WHEN WAS THE RESERVATION WITHDRAWN AND HOW

The British Embassy in Berne delivered a Note to the

Swiss Government, the depositary power of CITES, on 17 July

informing them that the Reservation would be lifted with

effect from 18 July

THE RESERVATION LED TO THE DEATHS OF MORE ELEPHANTS AND AN

INCREASE IN POACHING

Dr Leakey, Head of the Kenya Wildlife Service, and others have

said that there was an increase in poaching immediately after

the world ban came into force in January and that this was

attributable to the Hong Kong Reservation. We have seen no

proof however of illegal exports of ivory to Hong Kong, which

banned imports of raw ivory in June last year. And we note with

satisfaction that Dr Leakey said in an interview with the Kenya

Times in March that the price of ivory had fallen to such

a low level because of the lack of markets that poaching was

no longer worthwhile.

THE RESERVATION WAS A FAILURE BECAUSE ONLY

WERE EXPORTED

TONNES OF IVORY

The Reservation was entered to allow Hong Kong an extra six months

to dispose of the ivory in an orderly fashion. The fact that the

traders have been unable in the event to sell the ivory does not

mean that we were not justified in giving them the time to

try. And the retraining of ivory workers has proceeded well, as the

figures prove.

HONG KONG STILL TRADING IN IVORY

Nonsense. We have always said that on 18 July Hong Kong will apply

CITES without exception. This will be the case. Hong Kong will comply

fully with the provisions of Articles II and VII of CITES. The only ivory which can be exported is that which falls within the very

strict personal possessions exemption of Article VII. No tourist souvenirs will qualify.

Comments

Approved members can add comments, bookmarks, and private notes.

No comments yet.

Private Research Note

Private notes are available after approval.