The second plank of the policy is based on penal sanctions to secure a strong deterrent effect. Because the anti-poaching laws were enacted decades ago, it is now argued that the sanctions in form of fines and imprisonment are so meager that poachers are undeterred and instead hope to pay the fine from fortunes made though illegal trade. What then is observed as the policy response is a consensus that legislation must be amended to substantially raise both the financial and the jail terms. In particular, the fines stipulated for convictions have been eroded by inflation. An update is obviously in order to account for the effect of inflation but the logic of enhancement of the prison term remains unclear. While the crime remains serious threat to tourism, Kenyans should consider whether the cost of long-term incarceration for offenders is the best way to spend resources that could be devoted to preservation.

Another plank of conservation policy involves provision of equipment and recruitment of officers by the Kenya Wildlife Services (KWS) to ensure greater surveillance and robust response in the national parks. Increasingly, the surveillance is supported by the provision of military equipment and high technology gadgets to ensure safer tracking and rapid response. The message sent to poachers within the country is that immense firepower and modern technology will be used to fight them.

Allied to the three domestic policy stances is the forceful diplomacy at international levels such as the CITES (Convention on Trade In Endangered Species) evident in the commitment to an aggressive advocacy to permanently halt any trade in future and existing stockpiles of rhino horn and ivory. At this level, the main contention that drives apart southern African and eastern Africa nations is whether to allow for trade in accumulated ivory. Kenya has been successful in its unequivocal stance that no trade should be allowed at all.

This mixture of policy choices seems to have led to the maintenance of a viable elephant herd and in the last half decade, there was abatement in poaching. Abrupt resumption of poaching not only reflects the demand in southeastern Asia but should also be read as further signals that the four-plank policy stance is beginning to unravel. Regular display of recovered stockpiles of ivory ostensibly being set on fire is not an essential part of policy because the chemical composition of ivory does not allow for its consumption by fire. Displays of officials setting ivory on fire make for good television coverage but are merely symbolic and only communicate the hope that the public is ignorant of simple facts of chemistry. Such policy tricks harm conservation because the illegal traders in ivory are alerted to the fact that there is some ivory that they may recover through corrupt means because it has been declared banned. Discussion on the conservation of elephants in particular should be based on the truth to secure the genuine commitment of Kenyans in reducing poaching.

A coherent and pragmatic conservation policy should henceforth be focused on securing the cooperation of countries with surpluses of elephant herds. In this area, basic economic analysis suggests that securing the cooperation of countries such as Botswana, Zimbabwe and South Africa is desirable. This situation provides ample opportunity for trade in live animals to allow for restocking and the further diversification of the genetic pool. This special concession could form part of a bi-lateral or multilateral agreement that could be triggered by a precipitous fall in the number of animals below a threshold that would make recovery impossible.

Conservation policy is critical for Kenya but its elements should allow for policy innovation due to changes in the ivory and rhino horn markets. Revealed prices of ivory in southeast Asia together with increased arrests of smugglers of large caches of ivory suggests that poachers are responding to the price signal and may be building stockpiles in anticipation of extinction. It is therefore in Kenya’s interest to adjust policy with a more expanded analysis beyond moral claims, symbolic gestures such as attempting to burn ivory and militarized responses. Instead, government should identify what the threshold for extinction would be and commit to use of trade and other mechanisms to ensure that the conservation policy is multi-faceted and involves cooperation with other countries with an interest in conservation.