7 ms·

Awesome for the bears (really), but I'm annoyed that China doesn't do more to reduce demand for rhino horn, which is devastating the African rhino population fo

Awesome for the bears (really), but I'm annoyed that China doesn't do more to reduce demand for rhino horn, which is devastating the African rhino population for absolutely no reason. Black rhino population is down 95%+ since 1960. Other countries can definitely share the blame, but I would imagine China would be more sensitive to the issue since they have their own endangered species that we all celebrate.

seanmcdirmid 10y ago
Rhino horn is an essential ingredient in many Chinese medicines, while panda is not. Even though Chinese medicine is mostly bunk pseudoscience, enough people in China believe in it to create a crisis. The Chinese government is loath to reverse these beliefs, as it would mean investing a lot more money in real western medicine. In fact, Mao originally put forth TCM as a distraction from a serious lack of real medical resources in the 50s, from wiki: In 1950, Chairman Mao Zedong made a speech in support of traditional Chinese medicine which was influenced by political necessity.[11] Zedong believed he and the Chinese Communist Party should promote traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) but he did not personally believe in TCM and he didn't use it.[11] In 1952, the president of the Chinese Medical Association said that, "This One Medicine, will possess a basis in modern natural sciences, will have absorbed the ancient and the new, the Chinese and the foreign, all medical achievements—and will be China’s New Medicine!"[11] See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_Chinese_medicine https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_Chinese_medicine
- dspillett 10y ago
  > loath to reverse these beliefs, as it would mean investing a lot more money in real western medicine And more generally it could raise "what else that the government has been assuring us for the last X decades might also be wrong?" thoughts in the potentially-cynical-but-not-yet-actively-so amongst the general population.
  - dmix 10y ago
    Meh, they could spin it how ever they want. They're masters at that. The Chinese government has stopped harmful Chinese traditions on a number occasions without significant backlash. Especially anything that challenged their control. Just look at the suppression of religions, ethnic cultures, and many other traditions throughout China: http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/3948-commentary-6-on-how-the-chinese-communist-party-destroyed-traditional-culture/full/ http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/3948-commentary-6-on-how-the...
crimsonalucard 10y ago
Don't be annoyed at China. Be annoyed at human nature. The rhino gets less protection than the panda for one reason: The rhino isn't as cute as the panda.
- nnq 10y ago
  Or maybe 'cause the countries with rhinos are generally poor, while China is relatively filthy rich? (at least if you divide the wealth by the number of people with power, not by the "entire total"). When you have malaria, AIDS, racial wars, budget problems etc. it's kind of hard to prioritize endangered species.
  - DominikR 10y ago
    I wouldn't let anyone off the hook so easily, even if it is a poor African country. As long as Rhino horn trade is not a mayor income source for the government then how much does it cost them to introduce harsh punishments for this? China was also very poor when they started implementing policies to save the Panda bear. It's not that long ago that millions of Chinese starved to death, that's how poor they were back then.
patall 10y ago
You are mistaken. China very effectively fights against rhino horn smuggeling nowadays. It is primarily vietnam where the horn is consumed. It goes so far that the demand is heavily influenced by the economic situation in vietnam. Example source: https://www.savetherhino.org/rhino_info/thorny_issues/the_vietnam_question https://www.savetherhino.org/rhino_info/thorny_issues/the_vi...
- richardw 10y ago
  September 2016: "Rhino horn acquisition in China is mostly reported for its investment value" "The art and antiques market is a new threat to rhino conservation" "Chinese rhino horn auction records (n = 7,042, 2000–2011) showed a significant positive correlation between the volume of rhino horn auctioned in China and the number of rhinos poached in South Africa" http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320716303044 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320716...
  - patall 10y ago
    Interesting, I had not thought of the investment market. My statement still stands though as the article also states that Vietnam is the primary consumer (at 1/15 of the population and 1/80 the GDP of China). Presumeptly China could do more against it but that would probably be a more general strategy against organized crime than against poached rhino horn especially. And of course getting rid of loop holes like declaring ivory to come from siberian mammoths or before 1990 to make them legal. China is part of Cites and that it is enforced can be seen in Fig. 3 where the auctions drop dramatically in the last four years.
jjcc 10y ago
You comparison is valid ONLY IF Rhino lives in the area within China's jurisdictional control. Panda and Rhino are different cases. Don't compare apple with orange. Rhino could be saved if it was inside China. Let me explain: What BBC failed to mention is that Chinese government put death penalty[1] on Panda poachers. This is one of measures taken by government among others. It could be a human right's violation but it's not significant enough so BBC can choose to be blind. However to execute anybody who dare to buy or sell Panda skin, it's going too far. Chinese government would not do that other than threatening to do so.Killing drug dealer is acceptable although controversial, killing drug consumer is not acceptable. Go back to Panda vs Rhino: China have no control over poachers. Punishment on illegal trade alone is not effective enough. [1]http://www.riel.whu.edu.cn/article.asp?id=26339 http://www.riel.whu.edu.cn/article.asp?id=26339
- DominikR 10y ago
  I agree, it's as if one would accuse the drug consumer of being responsible for Mexican drug cartels torturing and beheading innocent civilians which is part of their business strategy. That is not to say that I approve of drug abuse, but everyone can only be held accountable for his own actions, not for the actions of others. It would be something different if the Chinese government actively encouraged import of Rhino parts, but they don't allow this as far as I know.
  - majewsky 10y ago
    > everyone can only be held accountable for his own actions, not for the actions of others. Once the rockets are up / who cares where they come down, / „That's not my department“, / says Wernher von Braun.
    - DominikR 10y ago
      Are you arguing that every drug abuser caught should be charged with murder? You kill the Rhino, you are responsible for killing the Rhino. You buy Rhino horn, you are responsible for buying illegal goods and creating demand. (which is not equal to actually killing a Rhino or a human being!) You fail as a government to prevent import of illegal goods, you are responsible for not controlling imports with 100% accuracy. You tell me if you know of any country in the world that is capable of preventing imports of highly sought after illegal goods to a degree that puts producers of these illegal goods out of business. If that was possible there would not be any illegal drugs in the West.
vsloo 10y ago
China is working on reducing consumption of endangered animal parts. It's a really tough battle especially since it's a deep-rooted cultural phenomenon. There are orgs like WildAid doing a lot of good work in educating the public. China is also getting ready to establish its first national park system to protect more indigenous wildlife http://www.pri.org/stories/2016-08-26/china-looking-us-it-builds-its-first-national-park-system http://www.pri.org/stories/2016-08-26/china-looking-us-it-bu....
- wuschel 10y ago
  This is true - wildlife conservation is an incredibly difficult endeavor. Classical strategies such as those employed by WildAid [1] are not the only approaches on how to help poor creatures to survive poaching. Unfortunately, governments are slow to adopt technologic approaches that might help, and there is fierce resistence in NGOs to do so. The Rhino is a classical example of that case [2]. [1] http://goo.gl/c8iQZs http://goo.gl/c8iQZs Panel on Conservation through Technology, New Harvest Conference. [2] www.pembient.com, http://twitter.com/pembient; http://twitter.com/pembient; Biotech Startup.
meanderer 10y ago
oh come on, how about stopping trophy hunting of lions? it annoys me that some western people are so apt to play the game of blaming China, just to take the moral high ground, but not to actually solve problems. I'm not saying that China is not blamable. it is. but so is any other country, group, even individual. the media bias is just disgusting. can we please try to understand each other and figure out ways to solve problems?
- guelo 10y ago
  Lions are classified as 'vulnerable' but not 'endagered'. So even removing the supposed media bias, killing the rhinos is worsex.
  - meanderer 10y ago
    if it is better or worse depends on your value. for me, lions being vulnerable instead of endangered doesn't justify trophy hunting. killing for fun is arguably worse than killing for medicine. in another scenario, dogs are not endangered. do you think it is ok to kill dogs just for fun?
    - aaron695 10y ago
      Is it OK to kill cows for fun? People could just eat rice, but eating cow is much more fun. So yes, most people are happy to kill for fun. At least trophy hunting is far more moral.
      - jpttsn 10y ago
        You confuse. Killing for fun is when the killing is for fun. Killing because eating is fun is different.
- richardw 10y ago
  I'm from Africa, and very aware that there is a lot of blame to go around, not the least of which are local poachers who sell our heritage. But while we're understanding each other, imagine if Africans were a large source of demand for dead Pandas for use in traditional medicine? The emotional response would be off the charts.
chrischen 10y ago
That's like asking why the US doesn't do more to reduce the demand for cocaine that is devastating central america.
- richardw 10y ago
  Except the US already puts a huge amount of money into doing what you suggest. At least drugs have the claimed effects, unlike rhino horn.
- jpttsn 10y ago
  Lots of people do ask that.
schuke 10y ago
Rhino horn is a much harder problem. Economically, the demand is overwhelmingly for the pandas' survival, because the way people 'consume' pandas is by seeing them live. But demand for rhino horns for medicine or other purposes mean they must die.
curun1r 10y ago
You should add shark (fin soup) to the list as well. Sharks take a long time to reproduce and grow to full size and, as apex predators, provide an essential function to our marine ecosystems. The practice of finning to make soup is a huge problem, and China is the largest offender.
sfifs 10y ago
Demand side control of hard drugs hasn't worked in the US and Europe which people by and large take knowing possible harmful effects. So why would demand side control of something people believe to be actually good work? Panda population was brought back as far as we know largely by supply side interventions - a combination of investment plus as someone else mentions, death penalty for poachers. The only instance of demand side control I remember actually working was when Greenpeace and the like mass broadcast ads of cute seal pups being clubbed to death but and models wearing fur coats trailing blood etc. Maybe, the appropriate imagery needs to be found for the causes of Rhinos and drugs by the activists.

seanmcdirmid 10y ago

Rhino horn is an essential ingredient in many Chinese medicines, while panda is not. Even though Chinese medicine is mostly bunk pseudoscience, enough people in China believe in it to create a crisis. The Chinese government is loath to reverse these beliefs, as it would mean investing a lot more money in real western medicine. In fact, Mao originally put forth TCM as a distraction from a serious lack of real medical resources in the 50s, from wiki: In 1950, Chairman Mao Zedong made a speech in support of traditional Chinese medicine which was influenced by political necessity.[11] Zedong believed he and the Chinese Communist Party should promote traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) but he did not personally believe in TCM and he didn't use it.[11] In 1952, the president of the Chinese Medical Association said that, "This One Medicine, will possess a basis in modern natural sciences, will have absorbed the ancient and the new, the Chinese and the foreign, all medical achievements—and will be China’s New Medicine!"[11] See https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_Chinese_medicine https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Traditional_Chinese_medicine

dspillett 10y ago
> loath to reverse these beliefs, as it would mean investing a lot more money in real western medicine And more generally it could raise "what else that the government has been assuring us for the last X decades might also be wrong?" thoughts in the potentially-cynical-but-not-yet-actively-so amongst the general population.
- dmix 10y ago
  Meh, they could spin it how ever they want. They're masters at that. The Chinese government has stopped harmful Chinese traditions on a number occasions without significant backlash. Especially anything that challenged their control. Just look at the suppression of religions, ethnic cultures, and many other traditions throughout China: http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/3948-commentary-6-on-how-the-chinese-communist-party-destroyed-traditional-culture/full/ http://www.theepochtimes.com/n3/3948-commentary-6-on-how-the...

crimsonalucard 10y ago

Don't be annoyed at China. Be annoyed at human nature. The rhino gets less protection than the panda for one reason: The rhino isn't as cute as the panda.

nnq 10y ago
Or maybe 'cause the countries with rhinos are generally poor, while China is relatively filthy rich? (at least if you divide the wealth by the number of people with power, not by the "entire total"). When you have malaria, AIDS, racial wars, budget problems etc. it's kind of hard to prioritize endangered species.
- DominikR 10y ago
  I wouldn't let anyone off the hook so easily, even if it is a poor African country. As long as Rhino horn trade is not a mayor income source for the government then how much does it cost them to introduce harsh punishments for this? China was also very poor when they started implementing policies to save the Panda bear. It's not that long ago that millions of Chinese starved to death, that's how poor they were back then.

patall 10y ago

You are mistaken. China very effectively fights against rhino horn smuggeling nowadays. It is primarily vietnam where the horn is consumed. It goes so far that the demand is heavily influenced by the economic situation in vietnam. Example source: https://www.savetherhino.org/rhino_info/thorny_issues/the_vietnam_question https://www.savetherhino.org/rhino_info/thorny_issues/the_vi...

richardw 10y ago
September 2016: "Rhino horn acquisition in China is mostly reported for its investment value" "The art and antiques market is a new threat to rhino conservation" "Chinese rhino horn auction records (n = 7,042, 2000–2011) showed a significant positive correlation between the volume of rhino horn auctioned in China and the number of rhinos poached in South Africa" http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320716303044 http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320716...
- patall 10y ago
  Interesting, I had not thought of the investment market. My statement still stands though as the article also states that Vietnam is the primary consumer (at 1/15 of the population and 1/80 the GDP of China). Presumeptly China could do more against it but that would probably be a more general strategy against organized crime than against poached rhino horn especially. And of course getting rid of loop holes like declaring ivory to come from siberian mammoths or before 1990 to make them legal. China is part of Cites and that it is enforced can be seen in Fig. 3 where the auctions drop dramatically in the last four years.

jjcc 10y ago

You comparison is valid ONLY IF Rhino lives in the area within China's jurisdictional control. Panda and Rhino are different cases. Don't compare apple with orange. Rhino could be saved if it was inside China. Let me explain: What BBC failed to mention is that Chinese government put death penalty[1] on Panda poachers. This is one of measures taken by government among others. It could be a human right's violation but it's not significant enough so BBC can choose to be blind. However to execute anybody who dare to buy or sell Panda skin, it's going too far. Chinese government would not do that other than threatening to do so.Killing drug dealer is acceptable although controversial, killing drug consumer is not acceptable. Go back to Panda vs Rhino: China have no control over poachers. Punishment on illegal trade alone is not effective enough. [1]http://www.riel.whu.edu.cn/article.asp?id=26339 http://www.riel.whu.edu.cn/article.asp?id=26339

DominikR 10y ago
I agree, it's as if one would accuse the drug consumer of being responsible for Mexican drug cartels torturing and beheading innocent civilians which is part of their business strategy. That is not to say that I approve of drug abuse, but everyone can only be held accountable for his own actions, not for the actions of others. It would be something different if the Chinese government actively encouraged import of Rhino parts, but they don't allow this as far as I know.
- majewsky 10y ago
  > everyone can only be held accountable for his own actions, not for the actions of others. Once the rockets are up / who cares where they come down, / „That's not my department“, / says Wernher von Braun.
  - DominikR 10y ago
    Are you arguing that every drug abuser caught should be charged with murder? You kill the Rhino, you are responsible for killing the Rhino. You buy Rhino horn, you are responsible for buying illegal goods and creating demand. (which is not equal to actually killing a Rhino or a human being!) You fail as a government to prevent import of illegal goods, you are responsible for not controlling imports with 100% accuracy. You tell me if you know of any country in the world that is capable of preventing imports of highly sought after illegal goods to a degree that puts producers of these illegal goods out of business. If that was possible there would not be any illegal drugs in the West.

vsloo 10y ago

China is working on reducing consumption of endangered animal parts. It's a really tough battle especially since it's a deep-rooted cultural phenomenon. There are orgs like WildAid doing a lot of good work in educating the public. China is also getting ready to establish its first national park system to protect more indigenous wildlife http://www.pri.org/stories/2016-08-26/china-looking-us-it-builds-its-first-national-park-system http://www.pri.org/stories/2016-08-26/china-looking-us-it-bu....

wuschel 10y ago
This is true - wildlife conservation is an incredibly difficult endeavor. Classical strategies such as those employed by WildAid [1] are not the only approaches on how to help poor creatures to survive poaching. Unfortunately, governments are slow to adopt technologic approaches that might help, and there is fierce resistence in NGOs to do so. The Rhino is a classical example of that case [2]. [1] http://goo.gl/c8iQZs http://goo.gl/c8iQZs Panel on Conservation through Technology, New Harvest Conference. [2] www.pembient.com, http://twitter.com/pembient; http://twitter.com/pembient; Biotech Startup.

meanderer 10y ago

oh come on, how about stopping trophy hunting of lions? it annoys me that some western people are so apt to play the game of blaming China, just to take the moral high ground, but not to actually solve problems. I'm not saying that China is not blamable. it is. but so is any other country, group, even individual. the media bias is just disgusting. can we please try to understand each other and figure out ways to solve problems?

guelo 10y ago
Lions are classified as 'vulnerable' but not 'endagered'. So even removing the supposed media bias, killing the rhinos is worsex.
- meanderer 10y ago
  if it is better or worse depends on your value. for me, lions being vulnerable instead of endangered doesn't justify trophy hunting. killing for fun is arguably worse than killing for medicine. in another scenario, dogs are not endangered. do you think it is ok to kill dogs just for fun?
  - aaron695 10y ago
    Is it OK to kill cows for fun? People could just eat rice, but eating cow is much more fun. So yes, most people are happy to kill for fun. At least trophy hunting is far more moral.
    - jpttsn 10y ago
      You confuse. Killing for fun is when the killing is for fun. Killing because eating is fun is different.
richardw 10y ago
I'm from Africa, and very aware that there is a lot of blame to go around, not the least of which are local poachers who sell our heritage. But while we're understanding each other, imagine if Africans were a large source of demand for dead Pandas for use in traditional medicine? The emotional response would be off the charts.

chrischen 10y ago

That's like asking why the US doesn't do more to reduce the demand for cocaine that is devastating central america.

richardw 10y ago
Except the US already puts a huge amount of money into doing what you suggest. At least drugs have the claimed effects, unlike rhino horn.
jpttsn 10y ago
Lots of people do ask that.

schuke 10y ago

Rhino horn is a much harder problem. Economically, the demand is overwhelmingly for the pandas' survival, because the way people 'consume' pandas is by seeing them live. But demand for rhino horns for medicine or other purposes mean they must die.

curun1r 10y ago

You should add shark (fin soup) to the list as well. Sharks take a long time to reproduce and grow to full size and, as apex predators, provide an essential function to our marine ecosystems. The practice of finning to make soup is a huge problem, and China is the largest offender.

sfifs 10y ago

Demand side control of hard drugs hasn't worked in the US and Europe which people by and large take knowing possible harmful effects. So why would demand side control of something people believe to be actually good work? Panda population was brought back as far as we know largely by supply side interventions - a combination of investment plus as someone else mentions, death penalty for poachers. The only instance of demand side control I remember actually working was when Greenpeace and the like mass broadcast ads of cute seal pups being clubbed to death but and models wearing fur coats trailing blood etc. Maybe, the appropriate imagery needs to be found for the causes of Rhinos and drugs by the activists.