Kerry writes: "The United States is sending a simple but powerful message to the sadistic poachers who kill elephants and other animals, and to all the traffickers who transport illicit cargo and the consumers who purchase these illicit goods."
An elephant in Kenya. (photo: Reuters)
The Crush on Wildlife
15 November 13
�
oday, in Denver, the Department of the Interior is destroying the United States' entire stock of confiscated contraband ivory -- totaling nearly six tons.
With this action, the United States is sending a simple but powerful message to the sadistic poachers who kill elephants and other animals, and to all the traffickers who transport illicit cargo and the consumers who purchase these illicit goods: "You cannot and must not mistake our seriousness."
We're not in this fight alone. We are building on the work of Kenya, Gabon, and the Philippines, which have destroyed their ivory stocks in recent years. We encourage other countries to take a strong stand against wildlife trafficking by destroying their ivory stockpiles.
But make no mistake: The world needs to do more. Time is not on our side.
One night last year, American scientists at the Dzangha-Bai reserve in the Central African Republic were forced to abandon a long-term elephant research site in the middle of the night due to instability in the area. When they returned the following day, the scientists discovered an unspeakable scene: The herd of elephants they had observed for decades was dead and tusk-less. Criminals had shot the defenseless elephants from the very research platform where they had been studied for so many years.
This is not an isolated incident. When my wife Teresa and I visited a wildlife preserve and went on safari in 2007, I heard tragic story after story of similar episodes. Last year, we held the Foreign Relations Committee's first ever hearing on wildlife trafficking to underscore the extent of the crisis.
Slaughters of wildlife have grown exponentially. The scale, pace, and sophistication of elephant and rhino poaching are accelerating at a devastating pace. Not only are these majestic animals disappearing before us, as poachers grow in sophistication and firepower, this explosion in trafficking undermines the stability and security of range states, and imperils those whose livelihoods depend on these great creatures and ecosystems.
We do not have the luxury of time. We must act urgently and raise public awareness.
Just yesterday, on November 13, I announced a reward of up to $1 million for information to help dismantle the Xaysavang Network, one of the most prolific wildlife trafficking organizations currently in operation. This is the first reward offer under our Transnational Organized Crime Rewards Program. Criminals and their accomplices are on notice.
And it's not just elephants and rhinos on the losing side of the rifles and machine guns. The accelerating demand for animal skin, pelts, bones and organs is decimating species across the world. When one species is gone, poachers move onto the next. If the current trajectory continues, many of these animals will go extinct during my grandchildren's lifetimes.
Reducing demand is part of any successful strategy to meet this challenge. Consumers can and must be partners with governments in disrupting the market incentives for traffickers. Because the reality is that prices for ivory and rhino horn are skyrocketing, which in turn leads to the knock down effects of more involvement of transnational organized criminals and other destabilizing elements, more corruption, and more collateral damage. Illicit funds allow poachers to ramp up their firepower and employ ruthless tactics that jeopardize communities and rule of law in countries across the globe. In Africa, poachers kill more than one hundred park rangers in the line of duty annually.
Wildlife trafficking is a conservation problem, an economic problem, a health problem, and a security problem. Our governments and citizens cannot afford to stand idle while poachers and wildlife traffickers destabilize whole regions, undermine economic development, and hunt elephants, rhinos, tigers, bears, sharks, or any species to extinction. Leaders everywhere must step up and meet the challenge of rooting out the corruption, graft, and complicity in the system that threaten all of us. The United States is committed to doing our part. Let's move forward.
|
THE NEW STREAMLINED RSN LOGIN PROCESS: Register once, then login and you are ready to comment. All you need is a Username and a Password of your choosing and you are free to comment whenever you like! Welcome to the Reader Supported News community. |
Comments
We are concerned about a recent drift towards vitriol in the RSN Reader comments section. There is a fine line between moderation and censorship. No one likes a harsh or confrontational forum atmosphere. At the same time everyone wants to be able to express themselves freely. We'll start by encouraging good judgment. If that doesn't work we'll have to ramp up the moderation.
General guidelines: Avoid personal attacks on other forum members; Avoid remarks that are ethnically derogatory; Do not advocate violence, or any illegal activity.
Remember that making the world better begins with responsible action.
- The RSN Team
I'm not sure Clinton could have, either. Had he vetoed repeal of Glass-Steagall, Republicans would have voted as a bloc to overturn that veto, and might have been joined by enough Democrats to succeed. I do wish he'd tried harder--but Clinton, like Obama, was chasing the mirage of "bipartisanship ." All that got him was impeachment.
And there was certainly no reason, as Bill Black points out, for Obama and Holder to protect the bankster criminals from prosecution -- except their allegiance to those crooks.
It is beyond me that there are still some people who think they have to excuse Obama for his immoral behavior. He had a majority in both houses, and the gratitude of the nation, for getting Bush and Cheney out of the way. He could have gone with an FDR-type program, "putting people before the banks."
He did not. He will be forever disgraced for his failure to do so -- and you should be ashamed for continuing to try to defend him.
Of course his Attorney General is not going to upset what has been a very advantageous relationship by prosecuting anyone in these businesses.
The main rationale for prosecuting criminals is to discourage others from behaving in the same way. Mr. Obama couldn't have prevented the meltdown during the Bush years, but he is not acting in a responsible manner to prevent future abuse leading to a possible repetition.
This Wall Street-dominanc e of the Obama Admin. was just as obvious in 2012.
Why do I not recall a serious call for his removal, from this source?
With blindfolds on could anyone really have told the difference between a Romney Administration- -and an Obama Administration these last 4 years?
Anyone think Romney would have repealed Romney-care--I mean Obama-care--and deprived needy insurance companies of many Billions of dollars in government subsidies?
Still several bipartisan wars & banker bailouts going on after all.
http://www.diffen.com/difference/Ethics_vs_Morals
It allows self-styled progressives to back bottomless banker bailouts and endless wars--from a president that they elected.
Holder was never the problem.
Geithner and Obama were.
And neither will have to pay the political price.
Commentators like Moyers forgot to mention anything along these lines in 2012--when it was just as obvious.
Perhaps, the idea is to sabotage the next Dem nominee?
There is a reason why media corporations pay 'name' pundits the big bucks.
All the way with LBJ, Bill...
Bill Moyers supported--and politically protected-- Wall Street creation Barack "Barry" Obama out of a decent Southerner's guilt about race.
His actions, however, have greatly benefited the original rather obvious Wall Street Bill Clinton-hating sponsors of the Obama candidacy.
And that would include, sadly, the 'Affordable Care Act,' which mainly guaranteed an income stream to Insurance Cartels--while strictly rationing care to patients.
I am doubtful that either FDR or Moyers' old boss LBJ would consider that to be progress.