10 April 2000: The Sunday NATION editorial ("Poaching by any name is appalling") fell into a tragic trap that threatens wildlife, habitat and the eradication of poverty among Kenya and the world’s people set by organizations and individuals who would mislead the press, the public and policy-makers at the national and international levels.

Poaching, the illegal killing of wildlife, is appalling, on this we all agree.

The deliberate spreading through the press of misinformation about the status and management of animals that results in the perpetuation of conflict between humanity and wildlife that in turn results in wildlife and human suffering is criminal.

Certainly the NATION misspoke when it said, "the only way to guarantee the future of the world’s wildlife is to ruthlessly destroy the market for animal products." Such a future is bleak indeed.

The biggest threat to wildlife is poverty and the lack of social order. Kenya’s wildlife service proved that point. An apparent lack of funds resulted in Kenya’s cutting its budget for enforcement against poaching by half, from $600,000 in 1997 to $300,000 in 1999. The result was an increase in poaching of Kenya’s elephants.

But poverty that threatens wildlife is not limited to an impoverished government. Throughout history, people fighting poverty turned to wildlife resources to slake their hunger. That is true throughout the planet. Even the United States did not see its people shift from "slaughter of wildlife" (to use the NATION’s term) to a national concern with conservation until that nation was able to feed its people. Its deer, elk, bear, antelope were all teetering on the brink of extinction at the opening of the 20th Century.

Today, its people enjoy an abundance of food as well as unprecedented educational and healthcare opportunities. They enjoy sufficient wealth that allows just their hunters alone to voluntarily pay nearly USD$500 million for wildlife and habitat management. As a result, their wildlife is thriving.

In Kenya and other range states, poverty is rampant. No one can deny that. Sustainable trade with a fair and just distribution of earned wealth, throughout history, has been the chief factor that has improved the human condition. Again, the United States, the United Kingdom and others prove this point.

Until poverty is eliminated and social order established among those people living in closest proximity to wildlife, pressures on wildlife and habitat will continue. Kenya is free to choose how it resolves such issues in its nation. Other nations, particularly those who only recently gained independence and freedom, certainly have the right to choose the path they and their people will follow.

Some, like Zimbabwe, Namibia, Botswana, and South Africa look to the surplus of their wildlife resources to help eliminate poverty. Some look to the bounty of the ocean. Minke whales number a million. Grey whales are more abundant today than before the days when the United States, Britain, Australia and other wealthy western nations sent their fleets to plunder the seas of whale oil and waste precious meat.

No one condones trade, illegal or otherwise, in truly endangered species. All nations, if they are to avoid the status of outcast, recognize the moral and ethical obligation to conserve wild species for this and future generations. They also recognize the importance of using what nature provides to feed their people and to insure that wildlife, humans, and habitat are maintained in a healthy balance.

Rather than burn ivory stockpiles and waste the gift God and elephants presented to humankind, Kenya should have used that wealth to reduce poverty among its government and people. The life of one child lost because the price of medicine could not be paid or the loss of one elephant due to the inability of the government to pay the salary of a single game guard cannot be the future the NATION sees for Kenya, its people or its wildlife.

When the earth’s people are fed, when they have hope for their future, only then will the future of wildlife be assured.�