Billions of Asians have been using Rhino horn for various purposes for thousands of years and nothing is going to stop them now. The CITES ban on Rhino horn trade has been in place for forty years and during this time 100,000 Rhino have been slaughtered in Africa.
So don’t you think it is time we changed our approach and tactics in this regard?
Posts
So far as I understand trade in rhino horn is banned by CITES, however private rhino hunters are allowed to dehorn their rhino so long as they microchip the horns and safeguard them.
ReplyDeleteShould these individual farmers not be allowed to get revenue from this? It would mean an income for the individual and perhaps with supply increased the demand (and price) would decline making it less enticing to illegal traders and obviously much safer for the animals themselves.
I do believe that if it could be developed and managed correctly - enforcing registrations of companies and only taking product from such companies, microchips and the tracking of the product etc. - this could be a win-win situation and would help prevent something similar to the elephant slaughter during the sales of ivory stockpiles.
Just my opinion!!
It is interesting but in fact shocking to know that there is no ban on killing rhino! How are we expected to save a species if we merily continue killing the animals? It sounds like a much better idea to me to rather impose a ban on killing these marvelous animals than to force people to kill them just to get the horn. Are there really no inteligent people left in the government?
ReplyDeleteI have had the good fortune of working both in the private commercial game farming sector as well as the conservation sector. I separate the two because they are in actual two very distinct entities with vastly different goals and objectives. One of the few links between the two sectors is the financial gain for conservation bodies when selling animals to the private sector, and information exchange between the two sectors which is mutually beneficial. My opinion is based on my experiences in the field and the countless discussions I have had with both conservationists and game farmers over the past few years, most of whom, I must add, feel that legalization of the trade in rhino horn is probably the way forward to ensure the survival of this iconic species.
ReplyDeleteRhino not only have its hunting value to thank for its prowess as a once sought after ranching species, but they also have RENEWABLE and sustainable resource stuck on the end of their noses. Purists will argue that white rhino need their horns for social interaction, and that seeing these majestic beasts with no horns is somewhat disturbing....I could not agree more, when driving around the KNP I would most certainly prefer to see a rhino with its horns intact than a dehorned rhino. However, in the commercial ranching sector, where sex ratios are manipulated to improve production, the negation of horn induced injuries and mortalities is nothing but beneficial, and the growth rates of commercial rhino populations which often exceed 30 percent per annum, when compared to the 6 percent average for conservation land across the country, is testament to the fact that the commercial game farmers have got it right.
Unfortunately, current legislation makes it extremely difficult for private rhino owners to realise the inherent value and financial rewards of this species as a game ranch animal. Coupled to this is the massive upsurge in illegal poaching we have witnessed over the past three to four years. The consequence is that more and more small rhino owners are selling their stock as they are no longer willing to accept the risks associated with keeping them, and the financial incentives of being a rhino owner no longer make sense. Current trends have reduced the demand for live rhino dramatically and their value is continuing to drop in the live game market as I write this blog. After all why invest in something that provides very little financial return as well as putting your life at risk? A very simple business decision to say the least.
The current day situation sees a dramatic increase in poaching of these magnificent animals by armed bandits and other greedy, unscrupulous criminals. On the other hand there is also an increase in the illegal trade of rhino horns by game ranchers, who have harvested horns, from their own rhino, and illegally sold them (but still have live, healthy, breeding rhino on their properties). The demand for the horn is real, and has been real for nearly 5000 years BC, and it is unlikely that it is going to magically disappear. This demand is being met (urgent need to establish what the actual demand is) by illegal horn traders, poachers and pseudo trophy hunters. The fact that the demand exists, surely indicates that were one to reduce the supply by either one of the abovementioned routes, that the reduction in supply would be filled by the one, or both of the other....simply put, banning hunting or trade in horn will in all likelihood lead directly to an increase in poaching.
Recent stats indicate that nearly 50 percent of the white rhino in Southern Africa are privately owned. With their markedly better population growth in the private sector, does it not make sense to legalise the trade in horn and let the private sector act as a buffer for our natural heritage in our parks? The ideal situation would be for each and every game farmer to want to own a rhino rather than get rid of it, to keep their value as high as possible so that they are worth enough, to spend money on protection and still make some profit at the end of the day. If rhino are worth enough, each and every horn supplied to the market could be DNA fingerprinted and traced back to source, making it virtually impossible and definitely undesirable for illegal horns to enter the market.
ReplyDeleteThe legalisation of this renewable and sustainable resource would give conservation bodies a massive financial boost, which is much needed in a continent where conservation is probably the lowest ranking government responsibility across the board. Rhino could be moved across the southern half of the continent, providing almost bankrupt parks with an income stream needed to survive, failed land claim properties could be rescued from almost certain demise and impoverished incumbents enfranchised, game farmers could generate income and rhinos could be protected cost effectively.
Surely South Africa, the one and only CITES signatory that are custodians of more than 90 percent of the world's white rhino population, should now be calling the shots. It seems to me that whilst most disciplines in the world are dynamic and continuously infused with new ideas, conservation and its principles are being left behind with many government officials still feeling the need to manage Africa’s wildlife on an historical basis. Now is the time for some serious forward thinking to ensure that our children’s children are as fortunate as you and I to see Rhino in the wild. At the recent rhino summit in PTA government accepted the notion to investigate the feasibility of a legal trade in rhino horn...I only hope that this market study is expedited because at a loss of more than 1 rhino per day our rhino population is not going to last long.
Perhaps we should ask the rhino whether they would like to be legally hunted for their horn, or have their horn harvested and sold ILLEGALLY and stay alive?
looking forward to seeing more comments
Dr Andre Uys
I would just like to say that I am not dead against the legal trade in Rhino horn (Or for that matter any animal/product) provided there is strict control.
ReplyDeleteOver the past 40 years I have seen more and more restrictive legislation enforced and all that it did was drive up the price of the commodity and to drive an even bigger illegal trade underground. Using the importation of birds as an example, the department of agriculture in its wisdom to curb bird flu has made it almost impossible to import birds from non-surveillance countries. (Unless you are a multimillionaire and can afford to fly vets at least twice per shipment to the country you want to import form)) The result is that illegal smuggling of birds has dramatically increased which has become a bigger threat to infecting the country than if the trade was made simpler but controlled, not to mention the uncontrolled burden on the wild caught birds .
So I personally don’t believe that legal trade is a bad thing. The big question is – can they control it properly. Traceability will be the biggest issue other than control at the ports of export.
Anyway my 2 cents worth
Regards,
Jimmy Magill
While the creation of a wildlife crime unit and a specialist division within the NPA to deal with rhino poaching are encouraging signs from the authorities - realistically these measures will do very little to mitigate poaching. As well known Rhino conservationist Rowan Martin said ," quite simply , there are more poachers than Rhino " what we need is a paradigm shift in the way in which we deal with the crisis.
ReplyDeletePresent strategies have failed , clearly, if we continue with the same strategy we cannot expect a change in the outcome. We’re all aware that poaching is driven by financial reward , the proceeds being reaped by organised crime syndicates instead of conservation authorities and private Rhino owners. Protecting Rhino from poachers is expensive and private owners are questioning the financial viability of stocking Rhino since there is no incentive. Harvesting Rhino horn as a sustainable resource has been well researched and documented. Legalized trade in Rhino horn through a well regulated central selling organisation would surely address many of the factors driving poaching. Andre’s blog of 18 Oct listed the benefits that would be derived from legalising the trade.
It defies logic that current legislation only allows you to sell a Rhino horn if you have a permit to kill the animal , while horns that have been removed or recovered from natural mortalities may not be traded. Reminds me a bit of the Aesop’s Fable , “killing the goose that laid the golden egg”.
Perhaps it’s time to stop discussing what we should be doing to save the Rhino and rather tell CITES what we are going to do to save OUR Rhino.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteThere have been two very good articles in recent issues of Africa Geographic that are well worth a read. The first by Ian Michler questioning the need for a revamp and total overhaul of CITES and the second by John Hanks, highlighting the exact paradigm shift that Phillip talks about. The fact is that after three decades of trade restrictions and bans on both elephants and rhinoceros nothing has been achieved in terms of their protection, to the contrary both have shown marked decline in numbers across the continent. I am not sure if there is one good example in the history books of a ban on any species ever having done anything positive for its protection…perhaps someone can enlighten if there is?
ReplyDeleteCurrent market prices of live rhino are plummeting because there is little interest, no incentive and massive risk owning them. Soon we will see the situation where protection will cost almost 50 percent of the value of the animal per annum, and it just won’t be cost effective for farmer’s to own them. Conservation authorities already run on shoe string budgets and the cost and responsibility of being the only remaining custodians of our rhino populations will be a massive financial drain on them. Moreover many parks are already lacking in manpower and can’t afford to employ more antipoaching staff. Legalising the trade would give conservation authorities the financial means to deploy dedicated staff equipped with vehicles and aircraft to protect the animals in military fashion. The demand from the private sector will increase and the much needed income stream from the sale of surplus animals out of our parks to the private sector will be secured. Should this not happen the demand and price will most certainly plummet and conservation authorities will lose millions of rands that they currently earn from live animal sales, by not being able to sell the 300-400 animals that they sell annually.
This all seems like a no-brainer to me, but it’s my opinion. I most certainly agree with Phillip in that I think its time we called the shots and inform CITES of the way forward to ensure the protection of our rhino.
What exactly is the responsibility of government? What is the strategic direction of government in rhino conservation? How transparent is government? How transparent is CITES and who is the real beneficiary of the ban on rhino horn sales? What is the current relationship between government and the private landowner? How healthy is this interface between private sector and government. What is the current product of this relationship - and is this relationship contributing to rhino conservation?
ReplyDeleteSo who is the real friends of the rhino owners and who is the real enemies??? What is the real cause for illigal harvesting of rhino horn in South Africa??
In response to some of Deon's questions. The reltionship between the Department of Environmental Affairs and the Private Sector is strained to say the least. The product of the relationship is a perfect zero. Current regulations see one having to deal with each province individually, each who in turn interpret the legislation in their own manner. TOPS which is supposedly national legislation is to date not implemented in all provinces, with Mpumulanga and Western Cape still not issuing TOPS permits. The issuing of TOPS permits in most provinces takes 4-6 weeks and very often longer, whilst Mpumulanga, manage to issue permits in a few days. I can but come to the conclusion that the implementation of the regulations currently is counterproductive to rhino conservation and protection, none of the provinces communicate with each other, no reliable data is made available at the end of each year to how may animals were moved in the country. The turn around time for permits is unacceptably slow, and this day and age of extreme risk simply makes you vulnerable, as everyones details float around government offices in an uncontrolled fashion for all and sundry to see. A recent armed robbery and violent attack aimed at stealing horns, on an industry member followed shortly after the issuing of a dehorning permit, of which only the owner of the rhino knew about...draw you own conclusions.
ReplyDeleteWith the current security risks surrounding rhino, permits shoul be issued immediately or at least within a few days. I have frequently waited for more than 2 months for permits to be issued. How does one expect to stimulate a functional, prosperous industry which brings billions of rands into the country in this fashion?
Ironically it is often easier to export a live animal out of the country than is to move an animal from one province to another. The centralisation of permits would simplify all these and provide a more controlled handle on what is really happening, not only for rhino but for all species. As a frequent permmit applicant for a variety of species, I object to having to make twenty phone calls and twenty faxes to provide information (exemption certificates farm details etc) to the very Department that issues them, because they do not have them on file. If they dont have these fundamental permits on file, what do they have? I pay for permits and I pay Tax, I expect service.
Were the current permit system able to provide me with any valuable information or statistics at the end of each year, and were I able to function and carry out my day to day job without being obstructed at every corner by shere incompetence, were I to know that my applications were confidential and my details protected I would happily pay for the service. THIS IS NOT THE CASE