An average amount of over 1.2kg was removed in this small single population of white rhino . All the animals shown are 2 years and older ( younger animals were dehorned , but not part of the stats ). Almost 3kg of horn could still be removed in the 12-year-old bull . It is no wonder poachers still kill rhino that was dehorned by the conventional square cut method .
Figure 8 : The use of protective shields , in a range of different sizes , provides both safety to the operator and the rhino and aids in achieving a much lower profile as one is able to cut closer to the rhino ’ s head without injuring the animal .
Why is the Kock and Morkel method so much more effective in preventing poaching as compared to the conventional square cut ? The obvious answer is the end result of the dehorning procedure – a low profile look . Compare Figure 1 with Figure 6 and the difference becomes obvious . The reality is that it not only appears that more horn was removed , but that quite a substantial amount of additional horn is indeed removed by performing the Kock and Morkel method ( Table 1 ).
|
Horn |
Excess |
1 |
3.1 |
1.64 |
2 |
2.24 |
1.26 |
3 |
3.88 |
1.13 |
4 |
6.68 |
2.97 |
5 |
1.69 |
0.77 |
6 |
2.49 |
1.03 |
7 |
2.77 |
0.63 |
8 |
1.48 |
0.92 |
9 1.57 0.75 Mean 2.88 1.23
Table 1 : Horn weights ( in kilograms ) of a population of nine dehorned white rhino , 2 years and older . ‘ Horn ’ indicates the weight of horn removed by the conventional square cut method . ‘ Excess ’ refers to all the additional horn removed by the Kock and Morkel method . Note : ‘ horn ’ weights are slightly lower as this population was dehorned 3 years ago using the conventional method .
It is a mere matter of risk equals reward . And with such a high reward ( 1kg = R1 million or so ) poachers are willing to take that risk . That said , even effective dehorning is not a standalone measure . It needs to be combined with other adequate anti-poaching measures . In those instances where it is combined with other measures , the poaching rate is zero . In the past three years we , in conjunction with other colleagues that we have trained in this method , have dehorned over 1000 rhinos in South Africa using the Kock and Morkel method . Not a single one of these rhinos have been poached thereafter .
Many of these populations were under severe poaching pressure , and once dehorned the poaching stopped immediately . Unfortunately , if often ends up that the poaching moves to other non-dehorned populations .
We thus need a unified tactical approach to dehorn the rhino population in this country . This will buy us time , and hopefully enough time so we can find a long term strategy to prevent rhino poaching .
The fact is not a single rhino needs to die . Dehorning is a sustainable option . I believe legalized trade has the potential to positively change the future of the rhino . For a short video on how dehorning is performed on a small private game ranch please watch : https :// www . youtube . com / watch ? v = OTwLP- VxBMM .
If the horn from this single dehorning operation could be sold it would fund the protection and conservation of that population of rhino for a number of years . Yes , there is also the added benefit of the farmers involved making lots of money . But there is also the potential for it to better the lives of the farm workers , the neighbouring communities and the country as a
2016 JULY 19
An average amount of over 1.2kg was removed in
this small single population of white rhino. All the
animals shown are 2 years and older (younger animals
were dehorned, but not part of the stats). Almost
3kg of horn could still be removed in the 12-year-old
bull. It is no wonder poachers still kill rhino that was
dehorned by the conventional square cut method.
Figure 8: The use of protective shields, in a range of different
sizes, provides both safety to the operator and the rhino and
aids in achieving a much lower profile as one is able to cut
closer to the rhino’s head without injuring the animal.
Why is the Kock and Morkel method so much more
effective in preventing poaching as compared to
the conventional square cut? The obvious answer is
the end result of the dehorning procedure – a low
profile look. Compare Figure 1 with Figure 6 and the
difference becomes obvious. The reality is that it
not only appears that more horn was removed, but
that quite a substantial amount of additional horn is
indeed removed by performing the Kock and Morkel
method (Table 1).
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
Horn
3.1
2.24
3.88
6.68
1.69
2.49
2.77
1.48
Excess
1.64
1.26
1.13
2.97
0.77
1.03
0.63
0.92
9
1.57
0.75
Mean
2.88
1.23
Table 1: Horn weights (in kilograms) of a population of nine
dehorned white rhino, 2 years and older. ‘Horn’ indicates the weight
of horn removed by the conventional square cut method. ‘Excess’
refers to all the additional horn removed by the Kock and Morkel
method. Note: ‘horn’ weights are slightly lower as this population
was dehorned 3 years ago using the conventional method.
It is a mere matter of risk equals reward. And with
such a high reward (1kg = R1 million or so) poachers
are willing to take that risk. That said, even effective
dehorning is not a standalone measure. It needs to
be combined with other adequate anti-poaching
measures. In those instances where it is combined
with other measures, the poaching rate is zero. In
the past three years we, in conjunction with other
colleagues that we have trained in this method, have
dehorned over 1000 rhinos in South Africa using the
Kock and Morkel method. Not a single one of these
rhinos have been poached thereafter.
Many of these populations were under severe
poaching pressure, and once dehorned the poaching
stopped immediately. Unfortunately, if often ends
up that the poaching moves to other non-dehorned
populations.
We thus need a unified tactical approach to dehorn
the rhino population in this country. This will buy us
time, and hopefully enough time so we can find a long
term strategy to prevent rhino poaching.
The fact is not a single rhino needs to die. Dehorning
is a sustain X�H�[ۋ�H�[Y]�HY�[^�Y�YB�\�H�[�X[���]]�[H�[��HH�]\�B�وH�[�ˈ�܈H�ܝ�Y[�ۈ��Zܛ�[�\�\��ܛYYۈH�X[�]�]H�[YH�[��X\�B��]������˞[�]X�K���K��]�ݏS����SK��Y�Hܛ����H\��[��HZܛ�[���\�][ۈ��[��H��]��[�[�H��X�[ۈ[��ۜ�\��][ۂ�و]�[][ۈو�[���܈H�[X�\�وYX\�˂�Y\�\�H\�[��HYY�[�Y�]وH�\�Y\�[����YXZ�[����و[ۙ^K��]\�H\�[��B��[�X[�܈]��]\�H]�\�وH�\�H�ܚ�\���H�ZY���\�[����[][�]Y\�[�H��[��H\�B���M����SB��NB��