The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) is the largest international conservation agreement that aims to prevent overexploitation of species. We look at the delay in trade ban listings for qualifying species, given the scientific consensus. We proceed to estimate whether there is preemptive trade in species that are about to be banned, and how quickly does the legal trade in such species decline. We find almost no overlap between the conservation science and policy. Unlike previous studies, we find little evidence for an increase in trade prior to the ban, and find that countries appear to implement the ban quicker than previously assumed. We argue this difference is the result of previous papers not accounting for countries joining the treaty over time.