Study Finds Destruction of Ivory Does Not Reduce Elephant Poaching Rates
The world’s elephant population has declined by half since 1979, with just about 460,000 elephants remaining — down from ten million a century ago. In an effort to curtail the death of elephants caused by ivory poaching, about 300 tons of ivory has been destroyed since 1989. Kenya organized the first public burn of stockpiled ivory in 1989, to raise awareness and deter the trade of ivory and elephant poaching, but does destroying ivory helped or hurt efforts to protect elephants?
A study led by Emma Gjerdseth, a postdoctoral researcher at the Yale School of the Environment, examined the causal effects of ivory destruction on elephant poaching rates in Africa and Asian countries. The paper, published in the journal World Development, is the first to examine the impact of ivory destruction. It found that in African countries, ivory destruction increases poaching rates with large spillover effects across the continent. In Asia, there is no evidence that elephant poaching rates respond to ivory destruction.
“The destruction of ivory is not saving elephants in the wild,” Gjerdseth said. “While poaching incentives in the country with a destruction event are unchanged because the price effect is offset by enforcement and publicity, it leads to more elephant deaths across the continent. This can create perverse incentives for countries acting on their own to participate symbolically while other countries on the continent incur negative externalities from displaced poaching activity.”
The study found that a destruction event in Africa increases poaching rates by 18% across sites.
“This research suggests that proper management of confiscated illicit materials should not involve destruction,” Gjerdseth said. “It also highlights the importance of accounting for economic incentives in wildlife conservation strategies and policies.”
More News in Brief
Schmitz featured on CBS Saturday Morning
Oswald Schmitz, the Oastler Professor of Population and Community Ecology, was featured in a CBS Saturday Morning report about how re-introducing wildlife to some areas could help combat climate change.
Oswald Schmitz
Oastler Professor of Population and Community Ecology
Heavy Rainfall Linked to Drought in Northeastern U.S.
A recent study led by YSE doctoral student Samuel Jurado uncovered a surprising connection between increased heavy precipitation events and dry soil conditions in the Northeastern United States, revealing that feedback loops, not previously observed in the Northeast, contribute to regional dryness during the summer months.
The study, published in Water Resources Research and co-authored by Jackie Matthes, a researcher at Harvard University, explores how more frequent heavy rainfall and increased soil dryness can exist simultaneously and intensify summer drought through a process known as land-atmosphere coupling.
“Imagine you have a flowerpot and one cup of water,” explained Jurado. “Each day for a week, you add a bit of water to keep the soil moist and the flower healthy. Now, imagine you have two cups of water, poured all at once at the beginning of the week, and the pot is left alone. Most of the water overflows or drains out. At the end of the week, the flower that received only one cup of water remains healthy, while the other, despite receiving two cups, may be stressed and dried out. As the climate changes, the Northeast is increasingly resembling the latter flower.”
The study has implications for land management practices, suggesting a need for strategies that enhance soil water retention.
“As water management becomes increasingly challenging for Northeastern U.S. communities, it is crucial to explore how landscapes influence atmospheric conditions, especially as precipitation patterns change and more frequent summer dry periods grow beyond historical experience,” Jurado said.
Study Explores Climate-Friendly Actions to Reduce Wildfire Risks
To prevent destructive wildfires, the U.S. Forest Service thins forests and places the cuttings, called residue, into piles for burning. However, a recent study led by Jake Barker ’24 MF and a team of researchers projected that a significant amount of carbon dioxide is released during these events, which works against climate-change mitigation goals. The burns are also financially costly.
The residue burns by the Forest Service are being used to prevent catastrophic fires that have been fueled by logging, drought, climate-change, and previous government-mandated fire suppression that have led to the accumulation of debris and dense stands of small trees, which provide fuel for enormous blazes.
The study, published in Frontiers for Global Change, simulated residue burning across western U.S. forests, and estimated that the burns contributed over 1.7 million metric tons of carbon emissions annually. The researchers found that that costs for labor and equipment were also notably higher than had been reported.
The authors suggest that alternatives to burning residues, such as using them for biofuels or burying them to sequester carbon, could help reduce fire risk and carbon emissions. Steep forest terrain makes removing residues for other uses difficult and costly. They recommend the Forest Service seek subsidies to aid in funding infrastructure for climate-friendly alternatives.
“Forests play a big part in natural climate solutions,” Barker said. “We’re demonstrating the opportunity for novel and creative pathways to transform residues into a natural climate solution.”
Forest worker observing a controlled burn. Photo: iStock/AscentXmedia