The most anticipated event of the inaugural Giants Club Summit held at the Mt Kenya Safari Club resort in Nanyuki, 100km north of Nairobi, on April 28-30, is the burning of 105 tonnes of ivory and rhino horn by President Uhuru Kenyatta of Kenya this Saturday, April 30.

The stockpile is from two sources. Illegal ivory and rhino horn confiscated from poachers and traffickers and “clean” trophies from animals that died of natural causes and that have been given up by the public following an amnesty. The consensus for its destruction is a collective effort of the Giants Club leadership.

The Giants Club Summit, convened under the auspices of the Giants Club and Space for Giants, brings together African heads of state, international celebrities, global business leaders and conservation groups such as the Kenya-based Wildlife Direct, Save the Elephants of Kenya, the Uganda Wildlife Authority, Botswana’s Elephants Without Borders, Gabon’s National Parks Agency, and UNODC’s Wildlife and Crime Programme.

Kenya, Uganda, Botswana and Gabon are founding members of the Giants Club, which was established in 2015 by the conservation charity Space for Giants under the patronage of UK-based Russian media mogul Evgeny Lebedev. Lebedev has described the scale of the elephant crisis as vast, saying that, “Since 2010, official figures show that on average almost 35,000 a year have been killed across the continent. If that trend is not stopped, they will be wiped out in the wild in our children’s lifetimes.”

The Giants Club’s objective is to protect at least 10 per cent of the African elephant population by 2020 through combating ivory poaching, providing political, financial and technical expertise and engaging the co-operation of African businesses operations.

Elizabeth Gitari, a legal affairs officer at Wildlife Direct and also a wildlife crime advisor to the Kenya Wildlife Service, said the burning of ivory and rhino horn stockpiles “is a powerful statement for wildlife conservation and a demonstration of political will,” adding, “One of the things Giants Club members are pushing for is for all the signatory countries to burn their stockpiles.”

Cameroon takes a stand

On April 3, Cameroon, though not a member of the Giants Club, burnt a stockpile of 2,000 illegally trafficked tusks and more than 1,753 ivory products seized from traffickers (a stockpile of 3.5 tonnes) to show its commitment to the war against the ivory trade and poaching in general.

The country’s Minister for Forestry and Wildlife Philip Ngole Ngwese officiated at the burning, which was also attended by Samantha Power, the US permanent representative to the UN who was in the country on an official visit.

With an elephant population of 20,000 only 10 years ago, elephant numbers in Cameroon have declined by half to date, according to Eric Kaba Tah, the deputy director of the Last Great Ape, a Cameroon wildlife law enforcement organisation.

Under Cameroonian law, trafficking of protected wildlife species carries a one-to three-year jail term and a fine of between $5,200 and $17,200.

Making a statement

The burning of ivory, however, has not been without controversy. “There is an argument by some wildlife experts and commentators that stockpiles of ivory and rhino horn whatever their source, should be auctioned and the proceeds channelled back to conservation and combating poaching. But that will communicate that a dead elephant has more value than a live one,” said Ms Gitari.

But even as Kenya was preparing to burn its stockpile, not the entire 137 tonnes of ivory and rhino horns inventoried last year will be torched. Instead, some will be showcased in a new museum for education purposes, the Kenya Wildlife Service announced this week.

READ: Kenya readies to torch tusks in bid to stamp out ivory trade -VIDEO

ALSO READ: Kenyan celebrities in conservation push ahead of ivory burn

KWS director-general Kitili Mbathi said a 25-tonne stockpile is still required for ongoing court cases while almost seven tonnes have been saved for education and research. KWS has said it will save the biggest tusks, those that weigh over 50 kilogrammes, from the stockpile to showcase them in a new museum that it will set up.

“The early poachers and game hunters in the early 20th century have gradually taken away the genes of the big tuskers. The very large tusks that are over 50 kilogrammes are being retained for scientific research, education and exhibition,” Mr Mbathi said.

Convention on Trade in Endangered Species

The history of commercial ivory trade over the past 30 years is complex. In 1989, the Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) banned the international trade in ivory, the same year that Kenya burnt 12 tonnes of ivory stockpiles, the first such event.

But since the CITES ban of 1989, various elephant-range states have sought a relaxation of ivory trading restrictions and after much pressure, CITES allowed South Africa, Zimbabwe and Namibia to hold one-off sales of raw ivory to Japan and China in 1999, 2002 and 2008.

The move was intended to supply lawful ivory (collected from elephants who died from natural causes), the counter poaching and to provide funds for elephant conservation. But neither the burning nor the legal one-off sale slowed poaching in the region, and Kenya once again in 2011 and in 2015 burnt stockpiles of tusks.

The discussion on the ivory trade remains divisive, but one thing is undisputed: the one-off stockpile sales and chipping away of the 1989 CITES ban have done little to reduce ivory trafficking and ivory demand, particularly from Asian markets.

Every year, hundreds of illegal tusks and horn are confiscated, and African countries continue battling organised, armed and well-financed global wildlife crime syndicates. Between 2010 and 2012, it was reported that at least 100,000 elephants on the continent were slaughtered in a poaching crisis with a global network of organised syndicates driving the illicit trade. This poaching crisis created demand for ivory that the world is still dealing with, said Ms Gitari.

Poaching versus livelihood

For countries in East Africa that rely on wildlife tourism, poaching harms both ecosystems and economic development, and is one of several threats to the future of wildlife and the industry, others being habitat destruction, the bush meat trade and human-wildlife conflict.

Wildlife produces economic benefits through direct tourism earnings and other land use models. Kenya earned Ksh220 billion directly from tourism and the sector provided 250,000 direct jobs in 2014, according to the World Tourism and Travel Council. The figures do not include the indirect tourism benefits such as cottage industries or goods and services purchased by the sector.

However, the conversation on land management in wildlife zones has happened mostly among scientists, foreign conservationists and overseas organisations, leaving out the population who co-exist with the wildlife and their development needs.

“Conservationists did not bring on board other expertise such as economists and community leaders to contribute to the wildlife conversation. So conservationists seem like people who care more about wildlife than people,” observed Ms Gitari. Yet local people have long been part of the conservation narrative.

“Kenyans give up their land for wildlife conservation through conservancies for what was for a long time unrecognised by law,” said Gitari. Until recently, the wildlife laws lacked a link between communities, their responsibility towards animals and the lawful exploitation of wildlife, a gap that was bridged with the passage of the Wildlife Conservation and Management Act of Kenya 2013 that replaced the Wildlife Act of 1976.

The Wildlife Act 2013 now recognises community wildlife conservancies and sanctuaries as a valid form of land-use, and outlines their requirements for registration and management. The Act also acknowledges wildlife as a resource that can be exploited for economic gain, and with regards to illegal activity the Act has substantially raised penalties for wildlife-related crimes.

The new Act has one of the harshest penalties in the world for wildlife crimes. For example, poaching and other activities that endanger wildlife now attract a Ksh20 million ($200,000) fine or life imprisonment or both. Bush-meat hunting for subsistence carries a fine of Ksh30,000 ($3,000) or six months’ imprisonment.

However, it still needs to be fine-tuned in order to build grassroots capacity for those living alongside wildlife.

In efforts to sensitise communities that live in wildlife ranges on the new laws, Ms Gitari was part of the Wildlife Direct team that put together a guide to the Wildlife Act of Kenya in 2015, a 33-page booklet that simplifies the new Act and outlines, among other things, compensation and mitigation of human-wildlife conflict, lawful wildlife uses, establishment of conservancies, wildlife offences and penalties, and the role of the Kenya Wildlife Service in wildlife protection, management and community engagement. The guide is distributed free of charge.

“One of the things that we are grappling with now is conservation and development,” acknowledged Ms Gitari. Yet with scientific facts and inclusive stakeholder dialogue it is possible to create space for both wildlife and sustainable development. “Once you really ask yourself what is in the public interest now and in 20 years or 100 years, then you’re bound to make the right decision.”

But more needs to be done to involve people on the ground and communities living in wildlife ranges.