Re: Legalising International Trade in Rhino Horn ???

Wed Jun 08, 2016 6:52 pm

Typical governance,... the arm dislocated from the elbow,..we have
a problem,...AM I SCRATHING MY HEAD OR MAYBE MY GAT!!,.. wow but
in between the two extremes of physical human being did I discover a
back that just loves scratching,.....Custos and the better governance of
a hot patato!!!

Re: Legalising International Trade in Rhino Horn ???

Sat Jun 18, 2016 10:44 am

Minister meets with rhino farmers on eve of deadline
Private rhino owners yesterday met with the Minister of Environmental Affairs, Edna Molewa.The Minister filed an application for leave to appeal to the Constitutional Court to reinstate the moratorium on the domestic trade in rhino horn on 6 June.The respondents have 10 days within which to respond.
June 15, 2016

PRETORIA-The Minister of Environmental Affairs, Mrs Edna Molewa met yesterday with representatives from private rhino owners, represented by the Private Rhino Owners Association (PROA) and Wildlife Ranching South Africa (WRSA) to discuss issues of mutual concern around rhino conservation in South Africa.

Both parties agreed on the need for greater cooperation in battling the challenge faced by rhino poaching and the illegal trade in rhino horn.

Private rhino owners laid bare the detrimental effect poaching has had on private reserves.

Currently approximately 33% of all rhino in South Africa are found in the private sector, with some 6 200 rhino on 330 reserves.

One of the areas explored in the meeting was the need to explore incentives for private rhino owners to keep rhino to halt further disinvestment. Private rhino owners indicated that the rise in rhino poaching has led to disinvestment from rhino conservation, owing mainly to the escalating security costs being incurred.

Minister Molewa provided an overview of the current legislative, enforcement and compliance regime and provided progress towards the implementation of the integrated permitting system among other things. This does not include permits for legal trade in rhino horn.

* The Minister filed an application for leave to appeal to the Constitutional Court to reinstate the moratorium on the domestic trade in rhino horn on 6 June.

No permits will be authorized to trade in rhino horn and any derivatives or products of horn until the matter is finalised by the Constitutional Court.

The application suspends the operation and execution of the High Court’s 2015 invalidation of the moratorium, and means that the moratorium on the domestic trade in rhino horn, or products or derivatives thereof, is once again in place.

The moratorium took effect on 13 February 2009 but was challenged in court by farmers Johan Kruger in 2012, and John Hume in 2015. Wildlife Ranching South Africa and the Private Rhino Owners Association of South Africa supported the application.

On 26 November 2015 the High Court of South Africa, Gauteng Division, Pretoria (High Court) set aside the moratorium with immediate and retrospective effect.

The Minister filed an application for leave to appeal to the High Court, which was dismissed. She then petitioned the Supreme Court of Appeal (SCA) for leave to appeal. The SCA in May 2016 dismissed the Minister’s application for leave to appeal with costs. No reasons were given for the order but the original court finding was that the process of arriving at that moratorium was lacking in public participation, as opposed to making judgement on the specific merits of the case. This finding was upheld by the Supreme Court.

The respondents in this matter are Johan Kruger (First Respondent), John Hume (Second Respondent), Wildlife Ranching South Africa (WRSA) (Third Respondent) and The Private Rhino Owners Association (PROA) (Fourth Respondent).

The respondents have had 10 days to respond in writing to the Minister’s application and to indicate whether or not the application for leave to appeal will be opposed and on what grounds. Ms. Eleanor Momberg from the Minister’s office confirmed that the deadline for the rhino farmers responding is tomorrow.

The respondents may also wish to lodge a cross appeal.

The Constitutional Court in February had harsh words for Minister of Environmental Affairs Edna Molewa‚ for delaying to publish regulations for a law that was signed by President Jacob Zuma in 2014.The hold-up of the regulations that were supposed to accompany the National Environmental Management Laws Amendment Act created uncertainty in the mining and prospecting sectors.The matter raised a serious dereliction of duty on her part‚ said Justice Chris Jafta. ... -deadline/

Re: Legalising International Trade in Rhino Horn ???

Sat Jun 18, 2016 2:18 pm

What is the advantage of domestic trade of rhino horns?

To be able to sell the horns to people who have the right channels to be able to to export illegally -O- if not, why?


What else?

Re: Legalising International Trade in Rhino Horn ???

Fri Jul 01, 2016 8:32 pm

=O: =O: =O: =O: ;-) ;-) ..0.. ..0..

Typical South African thought pattern,..

The whole world decides, on recommendation
from us, even the airlines, we turn clockwise,..
then .gov will somehow manage to try anticlock wise,.
=O: =O: when they were the ones that innitiated a

Guess SAA have managed a way of flying backwards!!!

0*\ 0*\ O/\ O/\

Re: Legalising International Trade in Rhino Horn ???

Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:59 pm

Dubious herbal meds harm kidneys

Update: October, 19/2016 - 09:00

Vietnam, HCM City — Patients with chronic kidney failure are putting their lives at risks when they use herbal medicines of unclear origin, a nephrologist said.

Within the first week of this month, the Kidney–Dialysis Department of Thống Nhất Hospital admitted three patients with chronic kidney failure for emergency treatment. Their kidneys got weaker after using herbal medicines of unmarked origins.

A 74-year-old patient in HCM City (whose name was not specified) got acute kidney failure due to a severe inflammation of the renal tubes and bought herbal medicines from a charlatan in hopes of easing limb pain.

His body swelled after three days of using the medicine. He got a dialysis at the hospital, but his kidneys never completely recovered.

Another patient, aged 87, used to drink powder ground from rhino horns in hopes of easing joint and back pains. After three months, she felt weaker and tired of eating. Results from a medical examination at the hospital showed a significant decrease in her kidney functions, despite them being healthy at previous checkups.

Nguyễn Bách, head of the department, said that each month the hospital’s kidney clinic treats an average of 2,000 patients with kidney failures.

Of those, some 20 patients got their kidneys severely damaged by medicines of unclear origin, he said. Some got hospitalised for long-term treatment, some must rely on dialysis for the rest of their lives.

Speaking at a conference on drug quality and origin control last month, Trương Quốc Cường, head of the Drug Administration of Việt Nam under the Health Ministry, announced that traditional herbal medicines of poor quality dominated the domestic market.

More than 80 per cent of the 60,000 tonnes of herbal medicines consumed in Việt Nam each year are imported, most of them illegally, he said.

Phạm Vũ Khánh, head of the Traditional Medicine Association, said that only 2.3 per cent (some 1,400 tonnes) of herbal medicines consumed in the country are imported with clear origin, which implies rampant smuggling.

There are two groups of patients who often got sudden renal failures due to the exploitation of unprescribed allopathic medicines, traditional herbal medicines, dietary supplements of unclear origin, medical liquor and rhino horn powder, according to Bách: elders who suffer from chronic joint and back pains and youth who want to improve their health and physiologic capabilities.

Bách said that medicine users should be wary of suspicious medicines, conduct thorough research about their origins before using them and only use medicines that are prescribed by doctors.

To prevent acute kidney failure complications, patients with kidney failure should not buy or use anti-inflammatory medicines without doctors’ prescription.

Traditional medicines should be purchased at certified medical centres in order to reduce health risks. — VNS

Read more at ... 5VVc44z.99

Re: Legalising International Trade in Rhino Horn ???

Wed Oct 19, 2016 5:15 pm

They must be living in another century 0*\

Spreading the voice that rhino horn powder is dangerous for the kidneys, might do the trick O** \O

Re: Legalising International Trade in Rhino Horn ???

Wed Oct 19, 2016 7:05 pm

they live in another century... you have visited India... you saw

Spreading the voice that rhino horn powder is dangerous for the kidneys, might do the trick \O could be start for a mini solution
Last edited by nan on Wed Oct 19, 2016 8:23 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Re: Legalising International Trade in Rhino Horn ???

Wed Oct 19, 2016 7:37 pm

I have been to VietNam too. But the people who have the money to buy the Rhino horn must be very well off and to be that you must have a certain level of education -O-

Anyway somebody might have learnt something :twisted:

Re: Legalising International Trade in Rhino Horn ???

Tue Aug 22, 2017 1:36 pm

[OPINION] Why allowing sale of horn stockpiles is setback for rhinos in wild

The Conversation | 33 minutes ago

A South African court has ordered the government to release a permit to the world’s largest rhino breeder, John Hume. The permit will allow him to host a 3-day auction of his stockpiled rhino horn to local buyers.

Hume is the world’s largest private rhino breeder. He owns 1,500 rhino, just over a twentieth of the total number believed still to be in the wild. South Africa lost over 1,000 rhinos to poaching last year, predominantly in the Kruger Park and in KwaZulu-Natal. Hume says that the proceeds of the auction will go towards protecting his herd, which he says currently costs him USD$170,000 a month.

Hume had been granted a permit, but it was withdrawn by the country’s Department of Environmental Affairs. A South African Constitutional Court ruling in April lifted a moratorium on the domestic rhino horn trade, upholding a previous High Court ruling. Hume then filed another court application to have his permit reinstated, which was upheld on Sunday. Such permits allow the buying and selling of rhino horn provided that the horns remain in the country after the sale.

Both the High Court ruling and the more recent Constitutional Court ruling are disappointing. While the moratorium was lifted on procedural grounds, the substantive case for a moratorium is profound. There is no evidence of a domestic market for rhino horn. In addition, a domestic trade contradicts the rationale of an international ban.

It therefore seems specious at best to argue for a domestic trade for conservation purposes. The only rationale for purchasing rhino horn in South Africa would be to sell it on to markets in China and Vietnam. The price of horn in those countries is estimated to be in the region of USD$60,000/kg.

Hume has been banking on being able to sell his horn, or see the huge amount he invested in breeding be sunk for nought. He has fought hard to be allowed to sell horn from anaesthetised rhinos that have been dehorned.

He has won the court battle. But the rhino horn auction that has been permitted by the court is a serious setback in the fight against poaching and the probability of wild rhino survival. The chances of the horns remaining in the country is next to zero.


The case for selling off rhino horn is based on two arguments.

Firstly, that without private rhino ownership, the species would be even more imperiled. Private property, according to South Africa’s constitution, should allow one to buy and sell as one pleases. This view defines rhinos as a purely private, commercial good.

The second argument is that an international ban has been ineffective in combating rhino poaching. Therefore, the only way to overcome the negative effects of high prices, which induce poaching, is to flood the market with horn that is cut from a cultivated herd.

The first argument is philosophical and has severe practical implications. Rhinos are our collective heritage – a public good in one of the purest senses of that term. The joy derived from viewing rhinos in the wild – public parks – is indivisible. To reduce rhinos to purely commercial products is to destroy the argument for public parks and the public protection of wildlife.

Hume and his supporters would argue that this is a false dichotomy. But they have failed to make the case that flooding the market with horn from commercially bred rhinos will help to maintain the species in the wild. This is partly because of the flaw with the second argument.

The idea that commercially bred rhino horn will flood the market, depress prices and prevent further poaching is without basis in fact. The international ban on rhino horn trade appeared to be most effective until a sudden shock hit the market – the escalation of demand from Vietnam in around 2006. Before that, rhino poaching in South Africa was negligible.

It is disingenuous, at best, to argue that the ban against horn trading is responsible for the upsurge in poaching. There is also no evidence that the market can be satiated by attempting to flood it. The risk of exploding currently dormant demand is too high. It also seems that traders like Hume want it both ways – to sell the horn for a price that earns a handsome profit but not so high that it incentivises poaching. Where this equilibrium is cannot be ascertained. So, it’s hard to understand how the argument can be sustained.

A government whose general bureaucratic efficacy is questionable surely cannot be trusted to regulate rhino horn in the manner supposed by the court. If one considers, for instance, that South Africa’s State Security Minister, David Mahlobo, has been implicated in rhino horn smuggling, the odds are not promising.

Ross Harvey is a senior researcher in Natural Resource Governance (Africa), South African Institute of International Affairs ... os-in-wild

Re: Legalising International Trade in Rhino Horn ???

Mon Aug 28, 2017 5:31 pm

In the meantime the auction has taken place.
mr Hume sold much less than he thought he would and blames it on the government.
But the fact of the matter is that there are not many buyers out there that will fork out that kind of money.
Certainly not if they are not able to legally sell it outside the country.
So no profit in it.
Specially not if the buyers are going to be asked what they have done with their purchase and if they do not have it anymore they will have to produce a bill of sale.
Molewa and consorts are not really willing to give out buyers permits so I think it will not be too long before another court case will be opened by Hume to see if he can get the government to enrich himself further.