To trade or not to trade in rhino horn? This was the theme of an intense debate that took place between two prominent conservationists, nature lovers and Wessa members last Wednesday in the Penryn auditorium.

Colin Bell and Dr John Hanks did not need much introduction for many of those present, since most of the audience were well acquainted with the issue.

Hanks is a zoologist with a PhD from Cambridge on elephant population dynamics with 45 years of experience in applied conservation management and research projects in several African countries.

ALSO READ:Debate about trading rhino horn, or not, heading for the Lowveld

Bell is a passionate conservationist, rhino activist and economist.He is also well known in the safari business.

The debate was led by Dr Llew Taylor who explained that, “within Africa, the prevailing belief centres on pursuing responsible, sustainable trade in rhino products, but further afield the belief seems to significantly reduce demand, suggesting a complete ban on the trade”.

Hanks presented his view with a series of slides depicting how the loss of rhinos grew from 13 in 2007 to 769 in 2018, peaking with 1 215 in 2014. The wholesale price peaked in 2012 at $65 000 per kilogram.

Lately poachers received an average of $2 273 per kilogram.According to him rhino security costs about R2 billion per year, or R112 500 per animal.

“Financial support to keep that up gets more difficult since potential donors experience so-called donor fatigue,” he said.

His support for legal trade is based on the fact that a rhino’s horn can regrow up to a kilogram in about 18 months; its removal while the animal is immobilised and tranquilised is painless, and there is no evidence to suggest that it impacts on the animal’s social life and ability to survive.

“The CITES trade ban has not worked but created an illegal market dominated by crime syndicates,” he said. “It essentially handed the monopoly to the black market with no compensation for rhino custodians.”

He asked whether, with China’s population of 1 419 000 000, that speaks56 different dialects, the cultural beliefs in the Far East would ever be changed.

“Should we perhaps accept it and try to meet the demand legally? It could result in a substantial income for rhino owners instead of the animals just being a financial burden.”
He admitted that legal trade would not necessarily stop poaching, but should be part of a comprehensive plan.
Bell put more emphasis on the subjective, emotional value of rhinos. His message was short and clear: A total trade ban is needed. According to him, tourism was too important a source of income to be neglected and tourists want to see rhinos with horns.

He pleaded for better security and stricter law enforcement to curb poaching.

Using an extensive study on elephant poaching, he tried to prove that trade bans had a major influence on the decline in poaching.

ALSO READ:Four caught red-handed with rhino horn in KNP

According to him numbers of both black and white rhinos increased in 1993, when all countries implemented CITES regulations.

He suggested that the use of rhino products stopped and alleged that the use of rhino horn in traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) was then made illegal.

“It is a lie that rhino horn is used in TCM,” he said.He also suggested that poaching increased since 2005, when South Africa got certain exemptions from CITES. “Criminal gangs took the loophole and poaching increased. They bought rhino horn legally and could launder it.

1. That was the origin of the current crisis.”
   Questions from the audience centred on whether the demand would ever be met; how to stop the illegal trade and how to regulate legal trade; the moral issues around trade and research supporting both.

To conclude, the audience voted on the issue and it was in favour of legal trade.