Trophy hunting

Save the Rhino does not fund trophy hunting, or accept donations from trophy hunting organisations, neither do we make decisions related to trophy hunting use. We understand that trophy hunting is a highly emotive issue, and it is a subject that we are often approached for comment on. We have produced the below discussion article on trophy hunting, to provide more information on the subject and allow readers to gain balanced information on the subject.

What is trophy hunting?

Trophy hunting is defined as “a specific and selective legal form of wildlife use that involves payment for a hunting experience and the acquisition of a trophy by the hunter”.

The trophy hunting of black rhino and white rhino in Namibia and South Africa is legal and is regulated by the international conservation organisation CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species). Some rhino range states, such as Kenya and Botswana, are completely opposed to trophy hunting; others, such as Tanzania, Zambia and Zimbabwe, are allowed to hunt other species but not rhinos.

Trophy hunting is only allowed under strict permit conditions, and a maximum of five black rhino per year may be hunted in each of South Africa and Namibia. The rhinos are selected on careful biological principles: rhinos used for trophy hunting are old, generally post-reproductive bulls, who may have a detrimental effect on the overall rhino population, by being aggressive or territorial. By removing the problematic individual, this may enable a higher growth rate for the population as a whole.

Two white rhinos drinking, South AfricaWhite rhino hunting is less closely regulated, as the overall population is much bigger, and hunting primarily takes place on private land. It is therefore in the interests of the owner to select rhinos for hunts, whose removal does not adversely affect the property’s overall rhino population. Trophy hunting has played a key role in the recovery of the white rhino population in South Africa, and helped the species recover from the brink of extinction.

What is Save the Rhino’s opinion on trophy hunting?

We understand that this is a highly controversial issue, and we have actively consulted with important conservation organisations such as the IUCN SSC African Rhino Specialist Group, and continue to take their advice on the subject. In an ideal world rhinos wouldn’t be under such extreme threat and there would be no need for trophy hunting. However, the reality is that rhino conservation is incredibly expensive and there are huge pressures for land and protective measures; field programmes that use trophy hunting as a conservation tool, can use funds raised to provide a real difference for the protection of rhino populations. 

Many conservation organisations recognise that the sustainable use of wildlife, including responsible trophy hunting of rhinos, has a valid role in overall rhino conservation strategies.

How does trophy hunting benefit rhino conservation?

There is enormous pressure on land and wildlife from expanding human populations. Land owners need to get a benefit from having wildlife on their land otherwise the land is often used for agriculture or built upon leaving very little space for wildlife to live. Income may come from tourism but this is not always an option.

At the turn of the century, only around 50-100 white rhino remained in South Africa and urgent conservation action, including the involvement of private landowners, was taken to save this species from the brink of extinction. Since 1968, South Africa has permitted the limited hunting of Southern white rhino and data from the IUCN African Rhino Specialist Group shows that since hunting began, the numbers of Southern white rhino have increased from 1,800 to over 20,000.

Rhinos in the DRCBy allowing private landowners to conduct limited trophy hunting of rhinos, this helped give white rhinos an economic value and allowed private landowners and communities to benefit from having rhinos on their land. It became an incentive to own rhinos. Currently almost 25% of Africa’s rhinos are privately owned.

Many National Parks have reached their carrying capacity for rhino populations. Private landowners and community land are important in providing habitat space to host and expand rhino populations. To do this, they need to receive income and derive a benefit from having wildlife on their land.

The current rhino poaching crisis is rapidly escalating, with over 946 rhinos killed in South Africa in 2013 as at 19 December. The increasingly high prices fetched for rhino horn on the black market mean that ruthless criminal syndicates are heavily involved in rhino poaching. Unfortunately, this means that it is becoming increasingly expensive for both state and private landowners to protect their rhinos from poaching; huge sums of money are needed for intensive anti-poaching and monitoring patrols, including ranger salaries, technology such as micro-chips and drones and transport such as helicopters and vehicles. In fact, several private landowners in South Africa are considering disinvesting in rhinos, as they can no longer afford the cost of protecting them.

Which rhino species can be trophy hunted?

White rhino are the most numerous of the five rhino species, and can be hunted in South Africa and Namibia. In 2004, the 13th Conference of the Parties (CoP13) of CITES approved quota applications by Namibia and South Africa each to sport hunt a maximum of five surplus male black rhinos per year.

No hunting is allowed of Greater one-horned rhinos, Sumatran or Javan rhinos.

Why can’t the money be raised in other ways?

Well yes, it would be nice if donors gave enough money to cover the spiralling costs of protecting rhinos from poachers. Or if enough photographic tourists visited parks and reserves to cover all the costs of community outreach and education programmes. Unfortunately, income from tourism and public donations does not provide enough money to protect and grow rhino populations. Tourism can be fickle and therefore an unreliable source of income. For example trophy hunting provided an important source of conservation income for Zimbabwe, during the recent political turmoil, when visitor numbers dramatically declined.

According to the IUCN ''successful tourism relies on a high level of capacity, capital, infrastructure, large wildlife populations, political stability and a scenic environment – all of which may be lacking; and it generally generates considerably greater environmental impact (through roads and infrastructure, water use, rubbish generation etc) than limited, carefully managed hunting.''

Benefits for the local community

In several areas, local community conservancies help protect rhinos on their communal lands. They need to see a monetary benefit from having rhinos and other wildlife; otherwise the land will be converted to other purposes such as farming. Funds from trophy hunting on communal lands provide an important source of income for community payments and other schemes.

In recent decades, Namibia has pioneered the way for successful community-based resource management, allowing local communities to become directly involved in wildlife conservation. In 1997 the Namibian government established the Game Products Trust Fund (GPTF), to channel revenue from wildlife utilisation into conservation.  The GPTF is about 70-80% money accrued out of utilisation, including money from rhino trophy hunting, tourism and hunting concessions. The Fund makes grants to a range of organisations, including conservancies, wildlife charities, and the Ministry of Environment and Tourism (MET), for use in wildlife conservation, with a particular emphasis on improving the relationship between people and wildlife.

Click here to read an article by Ann & Steve Toon, who interviewed Pierre du Preez, the national rhino co-ordinator for the Namibian MET, for more information on the role on the importance of sustainable wildlife utilization.

Permit abuses

The trophy hunting system is not without its faults and it is crucial that CITES keeps a close eye on how these quotas are policed, and makes sure any infringements are dealt with by criminal courts in the countries concerned.

Over the past few years, it emerged that Vietnamese criminal gangs were taking advantage of South Africa’s legal loopholes in trophy hunting, by recruiting individuals with no hunting background to pose as trophy hunters. The proxy hunters then bring back the legally obtained rhino horn to Vietnam where it is then destined to illegal markets. Overall Vietnamese citizens have hunted more than 400 rhino legally on privately-owned properties in South Africa since 2003. In April 2012, South Africa formally suspended the issue of hunting permits to Vietnamese citizens, which has led to a marked decline in rhino hunting applications from South-East Asian citizens.

Some have argued that – given the high numbers of rhinos being poached every year in South Africa – trophy hunting should be suspended, in order to prevent further (legal) depletion of overall rhino numbers. We believe that this will worsen the problem, as private rhino owners lose a major source of income-generation, while protection costs increase, and believe that this will lead to disinvestment in rhinos, resulting in a reduction of land available for rhino conservation. For more detailed comment on whether to put in place a moratorium on trophy hunting, please see this link:

http://www.peace-of-eden.co.za/blog/wp-content/uploads/2012/01/Rhino-hunting-moratorium.pdf

Conclusion

There is no silver bullet to solve the current rhino poaching crisis and trophy hunting to raise income for rhino protection will not succeed on its own. Achieving the survival of the five rhino species will need a combination of approaches: increased security for rhino populations; ensuring that local communities living in key rhino areas benefit from employment, education and training; proactive translocations to establish new breeding groups and maintain genetic diversity; building capacity in African and Asian countries so that conservation programmes are run efficiently and effectively; political pressure to enforce international agreements about wildlife trafficking; proper deterrent sentencing for those convicted of rhino poaching and horn smuggling; and demand-reduction programmes in user countries, primarily Vietnam and China.

Further reading:

Click here to read a comment from the IUCN African Rhino Specialist Group regarding the recent Dallas Safari Club black rhino permit auction

Click here to read a comment from the IUCN Sustainable Livelihoods Specialist Group regarding the recent Dallas Safari Club black rhino permit auction

Click here to read more about the recent Dallas Safari Club black rhino auction controversy.

(37) Comments

  • Andrew
    12 May 2013, 19:03

    I have to try and put aside my natural feeling of disgust towards anyone who can actually get enjoyment from killing an animal, especially an endangered species. My overriding thoughts are that hunting is wrong. Full stop. We should therefore be against it no matter what the arguments. However, I regrettably live in the real world where too many people care about themselves and money more than the wealth of the natural world around us. Measures have of course got to be taken to prevent the pseudo hunters from Vietnam and other places using the guise of trophy hunting simply to secure a supply of rhino horn for the illicit trade. Aside from that, it is clear that given a financial incentive to a private landowner to protect the rhinos on their land, they will do so and do so more effectively often than a Government Agency. If a single animal is selected because it is near the end of its natural life or is a particularly aggressive individual that is causing issues then I agree there can be a case for it to be culled in such a way that it generates sufficient revenue to safeguard the rest of the local population from poaching. I sit very uneasily with this stance and don't like it at all but if very carefully planned, monitored and limited then I accept it as a possible necessary evil.

  • Animal Welfare Org
    11 August 2013, 13:36

    I think you have got this wrong.
    1. Hunting is wrong.
    2. There are better ways of raising money
    3. Better & more humane ways of management
    4. This ill-advised stance will cost you a significant loss of donations
    5. I will no longer support you and will switch my allegiance to a more
    sustainable charity
    Yours,
    Animal Welfare Org

  • susan thabit
    20 September 2013, 15:38

    Hunting is wrong.
    2. There are better ways of raising money
    3. Better & more humane ways of management
    4. This ill-advised stance will cost you a significant loss of donations
    5. I will no longer support you and will switch my allegiance to a more
    sustainable charity

  • Mir Bahmanyar
    24 October 2013, 17:07

    Hunting is wrong. I will no longer support you. Moving on to a better organization.

  • Robert Watson
    30 October 2013, 07:06

    Another case of ends justifies the means. Endangered species are just that and sacrificing one or more animals to support conservation violates the whole principal and definition of conservation. The US Fish & Wildlife has already issued one permit in March to allow importation of a "hunted" black rhino from 2009 from Namibia where money buys whatever you want Now they are considering another permit for a "hunt " to take place sometime early in 2014 again in Namibia at a cost of $750,000. This is bribery or extortion whichever but it's blood money for conservation. Thankfully Zambia and Botswana have now banned hunting period.

  • Lee Coit
    31 October 2013, 03:11

    I will never support a charity that condones hunting of any wildlife. It is fostering the exact mentality that drove these animals towards extinction in the first place. Conservation groups are the last refuge of hope for these animals and people like me who support them. Please be warriors for the animals.

  • Curtis
    14 January 2014, 13:51

    Thanks for getting it - hunters help save species.
    Thanks!

  • Sherry Fuller
    17 January 2014, 16:22

    Much as I appreciate Save the Rhino’s honesty in bringing my attention to your pro-hunting policy before I committed to fundraising for the organisation, I must confess that my reaction to what I read on this page was one of horror and disgust. With the name ‘Save the Rhino’ I believed I would be supporting an organisation that protected animals; that gave a voice to the voiceless and vulnerable, that viewed the life of every single remaining rhino to be valuable, and that did all within its power to stand between rhinos and those that would harm them. It appals me that, instead, the charity is talking about rhinos as if they were ‘things’. Rhinos are not commodities for people to make use of as they wish. They are social mammals with lives and families. We know that, due to the actions of humans, their numbers are dwindling rapidly – we lost the Western Black Rhino only recently. To talk about killing ‘surplus’ rhinos is ridiculous logic. As there are seven billion humans, would it be ok for me to kill a few of the surplus ones, so I could make a living out of harvesting their organs? I doubt the rhinos who suffer and die would volunteer to give their lives ‘for the good of the species’. The name of your organisation is grossly misleading. I’m spreading the word about your pro-hunting stance. I very much hope you decide to review your policy. I would be ashamed to work for, or in any way support, such an organisation. Rather I will continue to support organisations such as Born Free Foundation, who have researched trophy hunting and do not find that it supports conservation nor local economies in any meaningful way.

  • Caroline Mason
    21 January 2014, 16:53

    Save the Rhino support hunting, as do WWF. You see, some people think trophy hunting aids conservation and there is also the 'sustainable use' and 'if it stays, it pays' argument. Best look where you put your money! In this instance, do we actually know where the money is going/has gone? Then there is the argument about trophy hunting helping the local community - it has been shown in many papers that this is not so - trophy hunting gives virtually nothing to the local communities. Then there is the 'fact' that the rhino to be hunted will be past breeding age. Some argue that male rhinos breed right up until their (natural) deaths. Then the argument about older males being aggressive. This is only a problem (if it is one at all) when animals are fenced in. Will this be the case in Namibia? What some who support this hunt have forgotten - these older males have the best genes - that is one reason why they have survived into their old age. All the reasons for this hunt have been debunked time and again. I say again, be careful where you put your charity donations.

  • Bertie Ferns
    23 January 2014, 12:49

    With regards to the permit abuse section, how can 400 rhinos have been legally hunted since 2003 if only 5 permits are issued each year for trophy hunting? Or are these permits just for state owned property?

  • Cathy Dean
    24 January 2014, 09:42

    Bertie: South Africa and Namibia are each limited to 5 permits max per year for black rhinos. The number of white rhinos that can be hunted in each country is unlimited (as agreed by CITES - the International Convention on Endangered Species). The private / community / state owner of those white rhinos will want to ensure that the breeding performance of the overall population is not harmed, so will regulate the number of rhinos that may be hunted on his/her land accordingly.

  • David
    22 February 2014, 18:42

    Trophy Hunting and the enlistment of hunter conservationists, as described in the article, is sensible, practical and necessary. It is a GOOD thing in every respect. Anyone who disagrees with the practical and effective use of this conservation tool does so on purely emotional and illogical grounds. I want rhinos to be around for my kinds and grandkids and beyond. Sanctioned trophy hunting helps make that a very real possibility. People that are opposed to this tool are less concerned with the actual welfare and preservation of the species than they are with their own emotional prejudices.

  • Mke
    08 March 2014, 01:02

    I am against all trophy hunting. I believe trophy hunters are arrogant expletives. What gives them the right to decide which "trophy" the rest of us will no longer be able to enjoy? There are many, many private game parks throughout Southern Africa which people from all over the world visit and pay big money for the privilege. Do they pay hunters to kill their best animals? I don't think so. They wouldn't last too long of they did. I doubt trophy hunters kill for the benefit of the animals but rather for their own egos. Capture for relocation or auction is a better solution. It is done throughout South Africa. Perhaps the hunters would like to donate their wealth and resources into this aspect of wildlife preservation. I am sure their contributions would be just as acceptable to recipients as they are now. This way the same animal can continue to be a viable resource well into the future.

  • Angela
    14 March 2014, 13:19

    I am totally disgusted after reading this and that WWF is also supporting this murder. People have given their own time and money to help conserve these beautiful creatures for big headed people with big wallets to come and kill what we have given our money to stay alive... They say its in the best interests but it is NOT they are selfish egotistical human beings who think killing exotic species makes up for them lacking in other areas. Why do they not give their donations to help the rhino without killing it. This rhino will wake up one morning from being kept alive for many years from poachers to then see a tiny group of human beings.. the ones that have kept him alive all this time turn around and shoot him. Pure betrayal, however money (and greed) makes the world go round.
    I will also never be supporting this charity again and will tell all friends and family that the chairty "Save" the Rhino is really not the case.

  • Alice Harding
    14 March 2014, 17:20

    It's good to get these informative articles as information is a vital tool, but these people like the WWF support trophy hunting which is not acceptable. They are not leading in the right way to go and they are sending out the wrong message, animals are a resource to be exploited for cash. It is bad policy to validate trophy hunting in ANY way.

    Please see www.endtrophyhuntingnow.com for more information on this subject.

  • Johannes Haasbroek
    15 March 2014, 17:06

    Very interesting post from SRT international, not SRT Namibia. Two totally separate organizations, with totally separate agendas. The fact is SRT Namibia does not support this hunt at all, so I find it highly irresponsible for you to make statements regarding rhino hunting in Namibia as if you are actually the experts on the ground doing the work? Your support with funding to Namibia SRT is minimal towards their overall budget, so who gives you the right to make statements regarding Namibian rhino conservation? WWF also has limited if any operations on the ground in Namibia, and neither has IUCN. The fact of the matter is that it seems like these justifications for hunting is supported by everyone not in Namibia, whilst the organizations that has been working on the ground many years to save the desert black rhino have to stay silent to prevent their funding being stopped? I would love to see the comparison between the executive expenditure or the SRT head office and what they allocate to SRT Namibia per year.

  • Anonymous commenter
    06 April 2014, 08:15

    I am outraged that WWF or IUCN would be in any way associated to hunting endangered wildlife. I was planning a safari holiday in Namibia but I am considering switching to Botswana given their decision to make hunting illegal in 2013.

  • Kay Hall
    12 April 2014, 13:53

    For this very reason I will not be supporting your work anymore! Trophy hunting is immoral and you cannot respectfully call your organisation 'Save the Rhino' anymore

  • Penny Wyatt
    13 April 2014, 01:12

    Are you friggin kidding me???? Responsible trophy Hunting! Sustainable resource! You make me sick!!!! The most endangered animal on this planet and you condone this! I am appalled and shocked at what I have learned today! More lies and deceit!!!! You should be ashamed of yourselves!!!

  • Joy Johnson
    13 April 2014, 04:14

    You can not "conserve" by killing. What you call "trophy hunting" is group-think technology aided souvenir slaughter by sociopathic thrill-kill high addicts and, for a hundred years or more, they have been taking the best, the biggest, the strongest, from every species on the planet. That has bred down the gene pool.

    In Big Horn Sheep, it is very rare now to find a BIG HORN sheep. They have small horns because those with small horns were given substantially greater chances to breed due to sociopathic thrill-kill high addicts needing to drag the dead body parts of the larger ones around the planet.

    It's time we all took a really hard look at what it means when a humanoid is willing, as Corey Knowlton was, to pay $350,000 - far more than the average price of a house in the United States for the extreme pleasure this wealthy man gets from taking a single life. How mentally ill is that? How devastating for wildlife gene pools is that mental illness?

    Do you really want to go on record as supporting this behavior or this gene pool destruction given than you collect funds from the public to "save" the rhino? You can not save a species if you support weakening it. Your beloved sociopathic thrill-kill high addicts are not willing to settle for the little sick rhino with no horn. They will always take the best - and you're supporting THAT.

  • Bonnie
    13 April 2014, 11:19

    Hunting an animal that is not given a chance to defend itself, is WRONG. Killing just because we can, is WRONG. Wiping out entire species because we have the weapons to do so, is WRONG. Taking a life just so you can hang its head on your wall, is WRONG.

    Nature takes the old, the very young, and the sick.

    Hunters take the biggest, the strongest, and the best.

    Don't you think that will cause a major upset in the balance?

    Humankind is DOOMED if this behavior doesn't stop. We will be among the extinct.

  • neon blade
    21 April 2014, 12:23

    So you've decided that what you perceive as a possible financial solution is more important than the death of morality. Just remember, this is what you are lying down with...
    https://scontent-a-lax.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-prn2/t1.0-9/10154421_438927706210006_5048904793786805250_n.jpg

  • Lynda Corkum
    07 May 2014, 18:49

    I agree with the majority of posters here... I would have thought that an organization called "Save the Rhino" would actually care about saving the rhino... oh right, they do care to save the rhinos for the hunters. All of the "hunting for conservation" arguments are starting to sound like propaganda. And yes, the rest of us are accused of being "emotional"... far better to have emotion than a lack of I think. A "financial value" is not always what matters... some things (ie rhinos!) are priceless! I also will never support this organization based on its pro-trophy hunting stance! There are many more NGO's worthy of donations and fund raising.

  • Yolande
    07 May 2014, 19:43

    I am just outraged about this article and sick of hearing that "we" (those of us opposing the hunting of an endangered species) are 'emotional'. Well, I am proud to be emotional as opposed to heartless,egotistical and greedy. Know your facts and what percentage of these trophy hunts are used for "conservation". BS! It lines the pockets of people who do not give a damn about conserving a species other than conserving their own wealth. It is no secret that Save the Rhino is pro-hunt and yes... it disgusts me. The "emotional" people out there are working for conservation. .. every single ranger, anti poaching team member and volunteer are driven by the same emotion you look down on..
    They're certainly not in it for the money. Thei earnings speaks for passion and emotion... and first and foremost REAL conservation.

  • Chris Dunford
    11 May 2014, 16:35

    I have been a member of STR for a few months and this article was pointed out to me this morning. I have read it and I am shocked that your organization could take this stance on hunting. There is a moral issue here, and that is that NO rhino should be hunted. It has a right to a life, the same as you and I. I hope that when I am older and past my breeding age and possibly a bit grumpy that nobody will pass judgement on me and decide that I should be put down.
    I have done considerable research into the benefits of trophy hunting and find that Trophy hunting is a very small part of the tourism industry in most countries. Overall trophy hunting accounts for less than 2% of
    tourism revenues. As a percentage of GDP the revenue is insignificant ie 0.27% in Namibia in 2012. Rural communities rarely receive any benefit from hunting. Hunting utilizes extensive areas and hunting operators contribute minute fractions of their revenues to any sort of community development.
    So why continue to use that tired old excuse of the benefits of hunting? Because its a smoke screen for big business interests to hide behind.
    Finally I wonder how any conservation organization can support the sort of deeply flawed and very sad people who kill endangered animals for pleasure and possibly to prop up their twisted egos (and probably other parts).
    Hunting for pleasure is wrong on so many levels. Giving it a semblance of respectability will only encourage more killing, and further fuel the Far East Markets for rhino horn. Flooding the market would just make rhino horn affordable for more people and further increase the demand. Anyone who doubts this only has to look at the ongoing aftermath of the 2008 Ivory sales. 35000 elephants a year now being murdered to feed the insatiable market. You cannot possibly believe that having more legal hunting will diminish the amount of poaching that is taking place.

    I will not be supporting Save the Rhino any longer. My money will go to another organization with cleaner credentials.

  • Olli
    16 May 2014, 03:25

    Funny that no one seems to actually read any of the reasons for hunting :
    "The rhinos are selected on careful biological principles: rhinos used for trophy hunting are old, generally post-reproductive bulls, who may have a detrimental effect on the overall rhino population, by being aggressive or territorial. By removing the problematic individual, this may enable a higher growth rate for the population as a whole."

    Simply if there are too many individuals in one area why would the government shouldnt sell the permits instead of killing the animals them self? Tell me a good reason please? I'm a bit confused here due to your arguments? If a professional says that there are extra individuals that might cause problems for the future of the species why shouldnt the problem causing individual be killed who would die any way?

  • Chris
    02 July 2014, 02:48

    Wow, you anti hunting morons really blow my mind. I mean seriously, did you not read the article? As of now, trophy hunting(And yes, the meat is still used, you really think it all goes to waste?) is the best way to conserve the species as a whole. It has worked out for the Deer, Elk, Moose, Bear, Sheep, Goat, Turkey and Waterfowl of North America, as there are more than ever, and it has also worked on the White Rhino as shown here. Kenya banned hunting and their Wildlife populations have dropped dramatically. Botswana is next. You all think with emotion and can't handle the truth. Pretty sad. Most of you have probably donated zero dollars to help the wildlife in your own countries. Hunters do that. What idiots you all are!

  • Jennifer
    03 July 2014, 01:37

    You lost credibility not only in you stance, but in your lack of knowledge of African Rhino species. The Northern White Rhino has a population of 17,000. The Southern White Rhino is critically endangered with a population of only 7 confirmed adults. The Western Black Rhino followed four of its sister species into extinction in 2013 due to, wait for it, hunting/poaching. There are only 4,000 Southern Black Rhino left. There have been articles about poachers taking animals from private hunting reserves, so private hunting reserves are not stopping the problem either. Maybe it would be better if people just donated the outrageous sums for these "hunts" (I use the term loosely since withe the jeeps and the guide and the baiting and sometimes even the animal being made accustomed to human contact, there is no hunting involved) to the national parks in order to hire and train more rangers to protect these dwindling populations. Maybe even buy more land to add to the park in order to sustain a larger population.

  • Cathy Dean
    03 July 2014, 08:46

    I'm afraid Jennifer, above, has got confused about rhino subspecies' population sizes and the date of extinction of the Western black rhino. See here for the IUCN Red List information on the two white rhino subspecies:
    http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/4185/0
    and here for the IUCN Red List information on the three surviving black rhino species:
    http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/6557/0

    Cathy Dean, Director, Save the Rhino International

  • Josh
    03 July 2014, 14:54

    Best comment goes to Chris. "You all think with emotion".

    It comes across like preaching vegetarians.

  • Timur
    05 July 2014, 17:13

    Conservation needs realism. Not idealism.

    To provide a metaphor - de-criminalizing drugs has actually led to a decrease in drug use (e.g> Portugal).

    Trophy Hunting is not the reason why species are going instinct. Decreasing habitat and poaching is the real killer. Trophy hunting balances the economics in favor of conservation. It creates an economic incentive to preserve rhino habitat and protect it from poachers.

    Some people are saying there are better way to raise money?
    Really? How? A truly sustainable and effective way that provides the cash to people who really can do something - not just spread ideals in blog comments?

    Also - anyone who is not a vegetarian cannot talk about how inhumane it is to hunt. If I was an animal I'd rather get shot then be killed by a machine in a conveyor belt.

    STOP WITH THE IDEALISM! Of course in a perfect world things would be different, but we aren't in one.

  • heath osborn
    06 August 2014, 10:04

    After reading your position on trophy hunting as a conservation tool I am planning to give you some money

  • vaithee,the red rhino
    07 August 2014, 05:03

    FIRST OF ALL HUNTING IS NOT AT ALL A WAY TO SAVE RHINO.
    you can think in what way hunting rhinos harms us but nature is a chain.moreover "EVERY THING DEPENDS ON EVERYTHING ELSE" is the basic rule of ecology.For the better living of humans we need to conserve both the plant and animals, thats bio diversity.We can't live without nature so you please don't harm nature,try to conserve it.The IUCN'S RED LIST IDENTIFIES RHINOS AS ENDANGERED SPECIES.you can't save rhinos by hunting them.Tourism is the best way to save them by promoting tourism you can get a huge income.Develop the infrastructure to attract tourist around the world.
    save rhinos.
    -"FEROCIOUS RHINOZ"

  • todd johnson
    10 August 2014, 18:13

    Wow, very educational. I'm not a hunter, but i am a huge animal lover and advocate. interesting read to say the least. unfortunately most of the people who want to save rhinos and other endangered species just sit and bitch on their computers, and even more unfortunate is that hunters are the main source of conservation funding! i would rather see these magnificent animals hunted and have a sustainable population than to go extinct.

    to the people who say that hunting is wrong period. give your head a shake, or the rhino and a lot more animals will go extinct because of you

    stop projecting your own selfish emotional views and think about the overall health of the species.

    how can you call yourself an animal advocate when your contributing to a species extinction

  • Stefano
    11 August 2014, 12:24

    HUNTING HELP CONSERVATION , IN ALL OTHER NATION WHERE HUNTING IS CLOSE THERE ARE NO RHINO ANYMORE DESPITE THEY HAVE MUCH TOURISM (TANZANIA,MOZAMBIQUE,ZAMBIA) , THE ONLY REASON WHY SURVIVE IN SOUTH AFRICA IS FOR THE EFFORTS OF MANY SMALL OWNERS , WHICH SURVIVE FROM HUNTING , CLOSE IT AND POPULATION WILL COLLAPSE.

  • Vicky Cole
    22 August 2014, 02:12

    Funny that all the pro hunters call those against 'emotional' , not to wish to see a noble animal which has been on this planet a great deal longer than we have shot and posted up on FB with an inanely grinning family or cheerleader straddling its carcass is emotional, really? I am sure if the same amount of advertising and rigorous promotion was given to eco tourism it too would be sucessful

    Also what about lions in Tanzania a recent report showing hunting is depleting 'stock' rapidly.

    Packer and co-authors, by analysing data from Tanzania, found that between 1996 and 2008, the lion “harvest” had declined by over 50%. This was not due to a lack of effort by the hunters, nor due to fewer hunters visiting Tanzania: since 1998 hunting has seen an increase in clients of 60%. The decline was simply due to the fact that Tanzania was rapidly running out of trophy lions, and clients were increasingly shooting underage males. The net result was that the steepest harvest declines occurred in areas with the highest harvest intensities, and trophy hunting contributed at a level of 92% to reduced success by statistical analyses. The lions were not poached, snared, poisoned, or shot by irate livestock owners; they were simply overhunted. Nor were they succumbing to factors such as disease and drought – lion numbers remained stable in tourist areas without hunting.

    Tanzania has always operated on a quota system, and this has long stood at 500 lions to be harvested from the approximately 300,000km2 assigned to trophy hunting concessions. Packer has mentioned that such quotas were excessive and have never been attained; the highest number exported was 314 in 2000. Packer has subsequently called for a great reduction in the quota, called for an age-minimum to be established for lions shot, and proposed outlawing the use of baits to attract lions to the hunters. The age- minimum has recently been adopted by the wildlife authorities, and it is now law that no lion less than six years old can be harvested in Tanzania (other countries could also impose age minima, but the “six year rule” should be adapted for other countries such as Botswana and Zimbabwe, where an “eight year rule” would be more appropriate as males there begin reproducing later than in Tanzania). Professional hunters and operators who continue hunting underage lions face fines and jail terms on the third offence. It remains to be seen whether such laws are enforceable, and as mentioned above, whether the Tanzanian professional hunting association will indeed also penalize transgressors.

    All this shows that hunting is not evaluated or calculated enough, except by hunting groups themselves? A study conducted by Loveridge and co-authors in Hwange National Park in Zimbabwe, that is surrounded by hunting blocks, probably gives the best indication to date of the consequences of trophy hunting on lion populations. Between 1999 and 2004, a total of 38 lions within the Park were tagged either with radiocollars or with ear tags, and 24 of those were shot by trophy hunters – baits were used to lure lions out of the protected area and into the hunting concessions. That offtake of 24 lions represented 72% of the adult territorial males tagged within the Park and 60% of the tagged subadult males. Two consequences became immediately apparent: the proportion of adult males/females declined from 1:2.8 to 1:6.3, and the rapid turnover of males resulted in increased infanticide. In terms of male turnover, two lion prides saw a change of males four times during the five years of the study as previous male coalitions were successively removed by hunters. A total of 19 cubs were lost most likely lost due to infanticide (directly observed on five occasions) from four prides. And at times, males removed from a pride were not replaced for considerable periods of time – in one instance no “replacement” males appeared for 16 months.

  • Jack
    22 August 2014, 03:44

    LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Add a comment

Your email address will not appear on the site
(Tick to hide your name when this comment appears on the site)
Save the Rhino have recently received a large amount of spam. To check you are a real person, we have had to introduce a human-ness question.
Please wait...