4 ms·
Hm. You've made me realize that the high cost of poaching (getting shot on sight) makes poachers less likely to even try to avoid killing the animal. What if we
by patcon 11y ago
Hm. You've made me realize that the high cost of poaching (getting shot on sight) makes poachers less likely to even try to avoid killing the animal. What if we made it "legal" or forgivable to tranq and remove the horn, but kept the massive punishment (jail or shot on sight) for killing animals like this? Would that change the motivations, at least theoretically. (Yes, I admit, it's hard to imagine a poacher having the skills the tranquilize and properly remove a horn without injuring the animal...)
I mean, if we think of the rhinos and horns like a fleecy flock of sheep in a commons, it's like we're telling people who want to shear the sheep that they will be shot on sight. This boosts the price of wool, and encourages people to shoot the sheep and quickly skin it. Otherwise, there is no way to get any wool ever. Seems like there must be a way to encourage a more long-term approach of shearing the sheep and leaving it to produce more wool and more sheep...
- erroneousfunk 11y agoThis has already been thought of: http://thewildlife.wbur.org/2014/10/15/dehorning-rhinos-a-whole-country-is-banking-on-it/ http://thewildlife.wbur.org/2014/10/15/dehorning-rhinos-a-wh... It's not the best solution -- rhino horns grow back slowly, poachers don't want to wait around for years with a flock of rhinos, and it makes the rhinos less able to do their thing in the wild.
- mikeash 11y agoAs mentioned in that article, one big problem is that poachers really don't want to waste their time, and it's hard to tell if the horn is there from afar, so they're likely to kill the animal regardless just so that they don't waste time tracking it down again on their next poaching attempt.