California Legislature Sends Near-Total Ban on Ivory Sales to Governor Brown for his Signature

SACRAMENTO (September 4, 2015) – In a show of bipartisan support for elephant protection, California’s ivory ban bill (AB 96 by Speaker Toni Atkins and Senator Ricardo Lara) passed the State Legislature and is on its way to Governor Brown for his signature.

The new legislation corrects a loophole in current law that allows the purchase and sale of ivory imported prior to 1977. This loophole has created a parallel illegal ivory market and made the law nearly impossible to enforce. AB 96 eliminates the loophole and bans the purchase, sale, offer for sale, possession with intent to sell, and importation with intent to sell of elephant ivory and rhinoceros horn. It also increases penalties for those trafficking in ivory and rhino horn to up to $50,000 or an amount equal to two times the value of the wildlife involved in the violation, whichever is greater, and/or one year in prison.

Earlier this year, NRDC commissioned a report showing that illegal ivory was moving through shops in Los Angeles and San Francisco and that the incidence of likely illegal ivory in California’s market has increased by 25 percent since 2006.

More than 100,000 elephants were killed by poachers between 2010 and 2012, leading some scientists to predict that African forest elephants could be extinct within the decade.

Following is a statement by Elly Pepper, wildlife advocate with the Natural Resources Defense Council:

“For too long, California’s broken ivory law has helped fuel the slaughter of African elephants. Today, legislators helped right that wrong and made a huge step in ending the illegal ivory market that’s been thriving under the current law.”

BACKGROUND

In addition to federal ivory laws, California passed its own law regarding ivory transactions in 1976 (California Penal Code section 653o), which makes it unlawful to import, possess with intent to sell, or sell any elephant part. However, uncodified language in the annotated portion of the code creates an exception for elephant parts imported prior to June 1, 1977, significantly weakening the law’s practical impact. This loophole has made the law impossible to enforce. Additionally, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife does not believe it is responsible for enforcing 653o because it is contained in the Penal Code, provisions of which are typically enforced by police officers, sheriff deputies and other peace officers throughout the state, and because neither the California Fish and Game Code nor state wildlife regulations enforced by the Department of Fish and Wildlife reference elephants or elephant products.

Assembly Bill 96 (a reminder of the 96 elephants killed every day in Africa), introduced by Assembly Speaker Toni Atkins and Senator Ricardo Lara, eliminates the pre-1977 loophole in California’s ivory law that has facilitated the state’s illegal ivory trade and bans the purchase, sale, offer for sale, possession with intent to sell, and importation with intent to sell of elephant ivory and rhinoceros horn. There are a few exceptions, including for musical instruments comprised of less than 20 percent of ivory or rhino horn, for bona fide antiques comprised of less than 5 percent of ivory or rhino horn, and for educational and scientific purposes. The bill also increases penalties for those trafficking in ivory and rhino horn to up to $50,000 or an amount equal to two times the value of the wildlife involved in the violation, whichever is greater, and/or one year in prison. And it puts enforcement responsibility for the law squarely on the shoulders of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife.

RESOURCES

• Report: Elephant Ivory Trafficking in California, USA 
• “California Introduces Bill to Help End California’s Contribution to the Elephant & Rhino Poaching Crisis” – by Elly Pepper, January 2015 
• “Ivory: The Elephant in the Room” – On Earth, February 2014 
• U.S. Fish & Wildlife Q &A page about ivory