Consider the BBC airing of Greenpeace-doctored video footage of Shell's Brent Spar oil platform. IFAW's thesis is that any legal trade will be used to provide cover for massive illegal trade because ivory in transit will not automatically be seen as illegally shipped, and hence will not be confiscated. There is no doubt that re-opening trade makes monitoring of illegal trades slightly harder. But the anti-trade arguments ignore the fact that poaching and international trade in ivory are not the elephant's main problem. Growing human populations means that elephants have a tough time competing with Africa's smallholder farmers for living space.
Farmers often kill elephants because they trample their crops and destroy villages.
This is the key reason why elephant numbers have declined in places such as Kenya. Nevertheless, the elephant is far from endangered with well over 500,000 animals across Africa. Perversely, the 1989 trade ban allowed poaching to increase in some Southern African countries because funds previously received from ivory sales were no longer available to pay for anti-poaching units. Making elephants valuable to Africans by allowing them to own the animals and trade in their products is the best way to ensure the species' sustained existence. Zimbabwe's elephants bring good returns to communities alongside farming and other rural employment possibilities.