-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
China bans ivory trade (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter fugl
- Start date
Farnboro John
Well-known member
Actions speak louder than words. There's a lot to prove here.
John
John
Of course, goes without saying, but it's a step. . .and I certainly share your worries about enforcement.
Jon Turner
Well-known member
It'll put the trade underground and won't have much effect at all - story yesterday about 3 TONS of Pangolin scales being intercepted in China says it all really.
This won't make the demand go away, it will put the price up, making it more appealing for the poachers.
I've been lucky enough to have seen lots of African Elephants over the years. It would be good if they were still there for my Grandchildren.
This won't make the demand go away, it will put the price up, making it more appealing for the poachers.
I've been lucky enough to have seen lots of African Elephants over the years. It would be good if they were still there for my Grandchildren.
So, you think the ban's a retrograde step, then?
Sangahyando
Well-known member
I share your concerns but OTOH, the ban could be the expression of a gradual cultural change regarding these issues, or at least contribute to it.
My thought as well. . ..
Good news! Big decline in Chinese demand for ivory. . ..
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...g-its-taste-for-ivory/?utm_term=.2a376f1f96db
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...g-its-taste-for-ivory/?utm_term=.2a376f1f96db
Nohatch
Mad scientist
Sadly it's not just elephants and rhinos: http://news.nationalgeographic.com/2016/03/160316-helmeted-hornbill-trafficking-smuggling-red-ivory/
But I agree it's a step in the right direction, at least on the national level. I sincerely hope Jon's worry will prove unfounded in the long run.
J
But I agree it's a step in the right direction, at least on the national level. I sincerely hope Jon's worry will prove unfounded in the long run.
J
NYC cracks down on ivory trade----
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/30/...l?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/30/...l?smprod=nytcore-ipad&smid=nytcore-ipad-share
Last edited:
Sangahyando
Well-known member
That link doesn't lead anywhere.
edit: wtf, there's an ad site in between. That's just bad form from the newspaper.
Last edited:
It's been happening to other people as well. When I complained to NYT "support", this is all I got back--
". . .Non-subscribers to the NYTimes are allows (sic!) 10 articles a month. If the recipient of your shared emails has exceeded this limit, they will not be able to access the articles you have sent until the next month. . .".
Agree, very poor form, short-sighted and stupid. You'd think they'd want their articles shared with non-subscribers! At the very least, there should be an explanation of why access is being denied. I'll complain again for all the good that's likely to do. . ..
Nutcracker
Stop Brexit!
You can get round this by either (a) opening the link in a new private window (which doesn't reveal your IP address, so isn't counted against the month quota), or (b) going into your cookies and deleting all the ones added by nytimes :t:
Both options fairly easy when using firefox; don't know about other browsers.
