zimbabwe’s Ivory Stockpile: A Conservation Dilemma

HARARE, ZIMBABWE – Every year, Zimbabwe spends nearly half a million United States dollars to protect more than 120 metric tons of ivory it has stockpiled in a vault at its national park headquarters in Harare.

This mountain of tusks is worth an estimated US$700 million as per government figures, but conservation advocates say the figure is likely inflated.

A 2020 assessment on illegal ivory trade by Wildlife Justice Commission shows that ivory prices fluctuate by region. in southern africa’s black market, a kilogram of raw ivory was worth from US$75 to US$85 in 2020, according to the assessment. Based on those figures, Zimbabwe’s ivory stock could be worth about US$9 million to US$10 million in the regional market. Prices would likely be higher in Asia. In Vietnam,such as,the going rate for 2020 was about US$400 a kilogram.

Even so, Zimbabwe cannot legally sell a single tusk. A global ban by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, a global treaty organization, banned the sale of ivory in 1989 at a time when the African elephant population was declining.

At the same time, Zimbabwe’s National Parks and Wildlife Management Authority, known as Zimparks, which maintains the pile, has struggled to fund basic conservation efforts. The authority runs on an estimated budget of about US$35 million a year, but has a deficit of around US$10 million each year, spokesperson Tinashe Farawo says.

Officials and other experts say a sale could help the country, which has struggled under a weak economy, to strengthen its conservation efforts, especially as elephant numbers keep rising and clashes between people and wildlife become more common.

The debate resurfaced in May at the Southern african Growth Community Transfrontier Conservation Area summit, a cross-border conservation initiative hosted this year by Zimbabwe.

Speaking at the summit, Domingos Gove, the director of food, agriculture and natural resources at the SADC Secretariat in Botswana, said that the ban restricts countries like Zimbabwe from generating revenue for conservation efforts. He called on member states to keep pushing the convention on International Trade in endangered Species to acknowledge the region’s success in managing elephant populations.

Repeated rejections

Zimbabwe and other countries in southern Africa have many times petitioned the convention for permission to sell their ivory. But the convention has consistently rejected thes proposals, mostly out of concern that it could trigger a resurgence in poaching. Other conservation watchdogs also say that even a one-time sale could ignite demand for ivory and undo decades of progress in elephant protection.

And this isn’t without reason.

In 1997 and 2008, the convention allowed a one-off sale in Botswana, Namibia, South africa and Zimbabwe to buyers in Japan and China. This was on condition that the money raised would go directly to elephant conservation and communities that live near the elephants.

In Zimbabwe’s case, the revenue from the 2008 sale, which came to about US$486,886, went to elephant conservation, according to a 2009 convention report.

But both sales also fueled a spike in poaching in Africa,according to the convention and some conservation groups. A 2022 joint press statement by conservation groups says that the sales fed markets in China and Japan – both major destinations for illegal ivory shipments.

Recent petitions,such as those in 2019 and 2022 by Zimbabwe,South Africa,Botswana and namibia,have been unsuccessful.

Numbers are increasing

Zimbabwe’s Ivory Debate: Balancing Conservation and Community Needs

“We are always in fear. They can camp even in areas where we fetch water,” says Dzomba, a father of one.

In the first quarter of this year alone, Zimparks received reports of 579 cases of human-wildlife conflict, with 18 deaths and 32 recorded injuries, according to a press statement.

The ban is not good for the community, Dzomba says.

“The ivory can fetch money that can help us as a country,” he says. It could help with fencing game parks and ensure the community’s safety. “There are instances when we call [rangers] in to scare the animals away but they will not have rifles or shotguns.”

But other locals do not think selling will make the situation any better. Selling will only incentivize poaching, says Fidelis Chima, coordinator of greater Whange Residents Trust, a residents advocacy organization in Hwange, where Zimbabwe hosts most of its elephants.

If a sale were to happen, the government needs to establish strong and effective safeguards to ensure that poaching will not increase, Chima says. He worries about accountability too, saying that local communities already receive little benefit from wildlife proceeds. This would need to be improved first, he says.

Farawo says while revenue from a sale would mostly go to conservation, the community would also benefit. “If a ranger is paid, he’s sending his children to school; the ripple effect naturally will be felt.”

‘Not one penny’

wildlife activist Sharon Hoole agrees that selling ivory isn’t a solution.

Key Takeaways

• Human-wildlife conflict is a significant issue in Zimbabwe, resulting in deaths and injuries.
• Local communities are divided on whether selling ivory would help or harm the situation.
• Concerns exist about poaching incentives and equitable distribution of revenue from potential ivory sales.
• Strengthening safeguards and improving community benefits are crucial considerations.