3 ms·

[author here] The article links several rhino conservation organisations pointing out why this is actually a bad idea - it would expand consumer demand for what

[author here] The article links several rhino conservation organisations pointing out why this is actually a bad idea - it would expand consumer demand for what is already an aspirational product, it would lend credibility to the completely fraudulent claims that rhino horn has any medical effect and it would provide cover for trade in poached horns. It sounds plausible, but ...

DennisP 9y ago
I could see all that being a problem if you sold fake rhino horn as a legitimate product. "Here, have some synthetic rhino horn, almost as good as the real thing." What I'm talking about is making fake rhino horn complete with DNA produced in machines, and selling it on the black market at a significantly lower price than poachers can manage. It'd basically have to be an undercover government operation.
- davidgerard 9y ago
  This already happens, per https://www.savetherhino.org/rhino_info/thorny_issues/synthetic_rhino_horn_will_it_save_the_rhino https://www.savetherhino.org/rhino_info/thorny_issues/synthe... - "* More than 90% of “rhino horns” in circulation are fake (mostly carved from buffalo horn or wood), but poaching rates continue to rise annually" I urge you to read that in detail, it's a comprehensive response as to why Pembient are likely barking up completely the wrong tree, and variants on the idea are probably not good either.
  - DennisP 9y ago
    Hmm I guess your quote might disprove my hypothesis. In any case I completely agree that Pembient's idea is terrible, and we should not have any sort of legal variant of rhino horn on the market. My proposal was to produce illegal rhino horn powder that didn't happen to come from rhinos, while being much cheaper (assuming that's possible). It's academic anyway because it'd have to be a CIA operation or something similar, and it seems unlikely that the CIA would care about saving rhinos.
    - davidgerard 9y ago
      I should note that Pembient have commented on the post making their case with several cites. (I still think the environmentalists' points are stronger, fwiw.)

DennisP 9y ago

I could see all that being a problem if you sold fake rhino horn as a legitimate product. "Here, have some synthetic rhino horn, almost as good as the real thing." What I'm talking about is making fake rhino horn complete with DNA produced in machines, and selling it on the black market at a significantly lower price than poachers can manage. It'd basically have to be an undercover government operation.

davidgerard 9y ago
This already happens, per https://www.savetherhino.org/rhino_info/thorny_issues/synthetic_rhino_horn_will_it_save_the_rhino https://www.savetherhino.org/rhino_info/thorny_issues/synthe... - "* More than 90% of “rhino horns” in circulation are fake (mostly carved from buffalo horn or wood), but poaching rates continue to rise annually" I urge you to read that in detail, it's a comprehensive response as to why Pembient are likely barking up completely the wrong tree, and variants on the idea are probably not good either.
- DennisP 9y ago
  Hmm I guess your quote might disprove my hypothesis. In any case I completely agree that Pembient's idea is terrible, and we should not have any sort of legal variant of rhino horn on the market. My proposal was to produce illegal rhino horn powder that didn't happen to come from rhinos, while being much cheaper (assuming that's possible). It's academic anyway because it'd have to be a CIA operation or something similar, and it seems unlikely that the CIA would care about saving rhinos.
  - davidgerard 9y ago
    I should note that Pembient have commented on the post making their case with several cites. (I still think the environmentalists' points are stronger, fwiw.)