No. As others have pointed out if you sell it you create a legal market of ivory good that can then harbor the illegally poached goods. No consumer is going to be able know the source of the goods they are buying. Related to that I’d argue there’s a chance there you are ultimately growing the market. You’ll have…

It’s no different than when the vory was in holding by the government. It was taken out of the market when it was seized; nothing is changed by it being burned.

Well, that’s just fucking stupid.

Actually, it’s exactly what our world needs. Or rather, our planet. The more carbon monoxide we produce, the faster we kill ourselves off. When we’re all dead and gone, our planet will once again return back to normal and thrive again.

A couple problems: 1) The law of supply and demand just made ivory even more lucrative. Ready for even more poachers ready and willing to employ still more ruthless tactics? 2) Instead of doing something, anything really, productive with the ivory, it was just burned, releasing massive amounts of carbon monoxide in…

Yeah. Because one thing about people who want such things as ivory or diamonds or what not, is that they usually have money to burn. So in other words, now, those poachers will make a ton more profit on whatever ivory they can get, and they can literally set any price if the client is so inclined to get what they…

It would set a bad precedent and imply poaching was ok. Yes, the destruction of the stock will probably drive up demand.

Thats what I was thinking? WTF basic economics?

The value of illegal ivory just went up. I’m wondering why they just don’t auction it off to pay for more park rangers to protect the rhinos and elephants that are still alive.