Rhino Poaching: Arrests, Prosecutions & Sentencing

[Richprins]

I have to agree with Penga...

As said above, these footsoldiers know perfectly well they will be killed if caught...end of story. So they make the choice!
It's not rocket science, and actually paternalistic to label them as "poor victims". They can go and hunt cows or something if they are that hard-up.

I don't agree with publically applauding their deaths, but that is just how it is!

The bosses have no problem in publically parading their ill-gotten gains in terms of wealth in Moz and SA...

Screw them, and the more their deaths filter through the better. That is the best deterrent by far!

[Sprocky]

Apparently two poachers were killed in the early hours of this morning by SANParks rangers near Crocodile Bridge.

[okie]

I certainly agree and have said so more then once and any civilized human being should understand this principle. To applaud the death of a human being is returning to the darkest hours of Middle Age.

Actually, it's the Vietnamese and Chinese who cling to medieval beliefs in using rhino horn as medicine , and certainly barbarism in the extreme for them to expect poor people from other countries to supply them and support them in this .

[Richprins]

Agreed, okie! The places these horns are going to aren't really bastions of democracy, so to speak...

Anyway, dup reports four poachers were killed in Kruger today...

[okie]

Well ... through the ages , poaching has always been a risky pastime/activity/business
Australia was populated largely as a result of poaching .
And rhino poachers take the risk of being shot

[wynand]

I haven't read through all 42 pages of this thread, so I might be repeating opinions here. Apologies if I am:

What we're discussing here is the war on the supply side, especially with the low-tier poachers. Out of absolute nescessity, "we" have mobilised forces to protect "our" rhino population at the level where we percieve the onslaught. That is, on the ground where rhino are being killed at an alarming rate. Public funds are being channeled into equipment (vehicles, aircraft, communications and observation equipment, uniforms, field kit and weapons) and also into the training and deployment of armed field staff. Rhino are monitored, insurgents are tracked, ambushes are set and game reserves exchange intelligence. With due respect to participants here who object to the celebration of human lives lost, I have to ask: "What do we expect?".

When we invest in the protection of a World heritage against armed insurgents by training staff and equipping them appropriately, we are setting the stage for human lives to be lost. The audience watching the "show" on this stage must choose: Pick a side, be indifferent or object to the show being staged in the first place. My reasoning is that the show can't be stopped right now. It has been forced upon us by market forces presently still beyond our control. The market forces have focused the attentions of international crime syndicates on our national parks and game reserves, striking right at the heart of conservation's last stronghold. Quoting Andrew Parker, former CEO of Sabi Sand Wildtuin and founding chairman of GAme Reserves United (GRU):

"The enemy is at the gates and if the integrity of our protected areas is compromised or lost, there is no fallback position. The fight to save the rhino is therefore symbolic of the fight to preserve Africa's last wild places."

What I'm saying here is that if an ambush or contact is successful (in the favour of the "green forces") we can't go: "Oh no, we've killed someone!". If we set out to counter the threat at the lowest trier, it is inevitable that people will die, and I've already made my opinion plain that we cannot afford to be indifferent. Certainly, one must be sensitive. Always. More human lives will be lost this year, probably on both sides, so think about your response to the impending news.

In a broader perspective, we would be callous (and a bit stupid) if we continue to focus our defence only against the lower tier poachers. If we do so, we are fighting a war without end, until the last rhino standing has been lost. As with the exploitation of just about any natural resource, the incentive will increase as the supply diminishes. The reward v.s risk balance to the low-tier poacher is massively in favour of reward. Quoting Andrew Parker again, who makes the comparison with a counter insurgency war, pointing out the fundamental difference:

".. this war is not being fought on ideological grounds. People are therefore not necessarily loyal to a cause and are being corrupted by the lure of easy money. Many rural communities are at best ambivalent and at worst hostile towards conservation areas."

To end this war, the fight must be taken to higher tier criminals, and the campaign must focus on the consumer markets in SE Asia. As importantly, it must be fought on ideological grounds in the rural communities where low-tiers poachers are continually being recruited by criminal syndicates. The mid-to high tier criminals are still largely unaffected and are incentivised to recruit and replace those removed from the system.

Hence, to end this war, law enforcement measures must be agressively expanded in collaboration with international agencies to disrupt organized criminal syndicates on the demand side. Such measures require political will, of course.

Then of course, there is the move to legalize trade in rhino horn, a topic that has polarized the conservation community. Legalized trade, if it comes, must be coupled with incentives for rural communites to become directly involved sutainable horn production. I'm not sure how that will go, but I believe it is one tactic that could be useful within the overall strategy.

This post is starting to go on a bit, so I'll close and report on the "Rhino Ambassadors" program (ideological engagement in the communities) later.

[Richprins]

Thank you very much indeed for a lucid, earnest and thoughtful response, wynand! I believe you will be able to add great value to these discussions, and would like to welcome you to the forums and look forward eagerly to your contributions!

[Toko]

waynand, you have a point there saying that legal trade in horn should benefit comminities. But so far there is only much talk of legalizing trade in stock piled horns from dead rhino (and even that is not clear if only from natural causes or also horns from seizure). Commercial harvesting of horn and selling this is another story

[Mel]

Thanks for this well worded point of view, wynand!

[wynand]

Thank you, Richprins. Thanks, Mel.

Toko, from what I hear (ohhh... I said it: "from what I hear" must be rumormongering), there are plans afoot or, at least, intentions have been declared to donate a significant number of rhino bulls to willing and able communities for the purpose of sustainable horn production. I'm not involved in any of that and I don't know how that is going. The purpose with that is not to flood the market but to see to it that rural communities gain a stake in the custodianship of rhino.

The much vaunted "flooding of the market" with stake stockpiles is, of course, not compatible with this initiative. Still, I think it is good that interventions on the sociopolical and economic fronts are discussed. The next CITES meeting is in 2016. For some, who see legalized trade,as a means of addressing the problem (either through "flooding" or through "sustainable harvesting") 2016 is not soon enough. I think these matters have to be debated urgently and earnestly if we want to be ready with a cohesive argument for legalized trade (or not) by 2016.