Re: Rhino Poaching 2016

Fri Nov 18, 2016 8:24 am

:-( :-(

Re: Rhino Poaching 2016

Tue Dec 27, 2016 9:38 am

4 rhinos slaughtered on North West game farm

2016-12-26 12:08


Sarel van der Walt, Netwerk24





Pretoria – Four rhinos died a gruesome death in a boma on a private game farm in North West this weekend, Netwerk24 has reported.

A fifth rhino survived the attack at Bona Bona Game Lodge, between Klerksdorp and Wolmaransstad.

The rhinos were dehorned, police spokesperson Brigadier Sabata Mokgwabone said on Monday.

No arrests have been made yet.




The lodge’s Pieter Ernst Jr could not be reached for comment.

http://www.news24.com/SouthAfrica/News/ ... m-20161226

Re: Rhino Poaching 2016

Thu Dec 29, 2016 12:42 am

‘Fewer rhinos killed in 2016’

However, the Outraged South African Citizens Against Poaching Organisation says it’s still concerned about the peak in rhino killings this festive season.


Victor Magwedze | about 5 hours ago

JOHANNESBURG - The Department of Environmental Affairs says it believes the number of rhinos killed this year has decreased compared to last year.

The department’s Albi Modise says their partnership with law enforcement agencies and other organisations has resulted in almost a 100 less rhino being killed by September when the figure stood at over 700.

However, the Outraged South African Citizens Against Poaching Organisation says it’s still concerned about the peak in rhino killings this festive season.

Modise says this year’s full statistics will be released next year.

“September stats say the number of rhinos poached had declined between January and September. If we continue with that pattern, we are likely to see a decline, but of course we are very cautious.”

Re: Rhino Poaching 2016

Thu Dec 29, 2016 12:49 am

:-? :-? But I see you're not finished w/ the post it seems

Re: Rhino Poaching 2016

Thu Dec 29, 2016 12:50 am

\O

Re: Rhino Poaching 2016

Sat Jan 07, 2017 11:21 am

Posted on OSCAP FB page this morning:

Allison Thomson: These are the stats I have so far for 2016. One has to remember that the population has diminished somewhat so the poaching rate compared to the size of the population size is relevant. One also has to keep in mind that a number of rhinos have been exported thereby diminishing the population even further.
It must be noted that it appears that the rate of incursions are not decreasing which means that finding rhino to poach is just getting more difficult as the population is so much smaller. You will hear once again this year when the officials find the time to notify the public of what a good job they are doing that they have the poaching crisis under control and all the wonderful things they are doing and how many arrests they have made blah blah blah - but you will need to read between all this rhetoric and ask pertinent questions like what percentage of the current population has been poached, what is the conviction rate compared to the arrest rate etc.
These stats could be a lot higher still as carcasses are still being found that were poached last year and not yet in the stats. My stats for Limpopo and NW are estimates I have made with poachings I have recorded and other info I have received:

Kruger: 672
Kwazulu Natal 161
Eastern Cape 20
Limpopo (est) 115
Mpumulanga 31
Gauteng 3
Western Cape 0
N Cape 6
Free State 4
North West (est) 90
1102

Re: Rhino Poaching 2016

Sat Jan 07, 2017 4:26 pm

What a disaster! 0*\

Re: Rhino Poaching 2016

Sat Jan 07, 2017 5:16 pm

I'm not sure if rhino relocations or smaller numbers available are that relevant? The number is still staying the same, which would make the percentage even worse, if that is the case, though... O-/

I do know that the Moz poachers are tired of being killed, and believe antipoaching is working in Kruger in that regard. However, inside jobs and poaching by officials is rising dramatically as more arrive to feed at the trough, so to speak. And the Moz types are used by syndicates in the rest of SA for their "expertise".

Personally I think that the locusts will polish off most rhino in 2 years or so, before proper governance hopefully takes over slowly, leaving us back at square one... 0*\

Another thing is that the whole antipoaching effort has become a massive industry with billions of rands poured in in various ways, as someone pointed out... O-/

Re: Rhino Poaching 2016

Sat Jan 07, 2017 5:19 pm

Richprins wrote:
Another thing is that the whole anti-poaching effort has become a massive industry with billions of Rands poured in in various ways, as someone pointed out... O-/

Re: Rhino Poaching 2016

Sat Jan 07, 2017 6:30 pm

On the Same Post comment from Alison:

Allison Thomson This was sent to me anonymously earlier in the year and sets out the issues involved in reporting of stats:

RHINO POACHING STATISTICS

1. INTRODUCTION
1.1. There are various reasons why the carcass, arrest and incident data that is being generated by SANParks, and specifically the KNP, is error-riddled and inaccurate. Apart from the general lack of statistical and data-management skills and capability inside the organisation, there exists a deeper and more entrenched issue. This issue relates to the manner in which the anti-rhino poaching operation’s effectiveness is measured, i.e. the number of rhino carcasses. This singular and narrow-minded view of efficacy has resulted in SANParks employees across the spectrum (i.e. from management at the head office all the way down to the field ranger in the park) being obsessed with the number of carcasses that have been reported. Unfortunately, this monocular definition of effectiveness incentivises everyone in the organisation to find creative and under-handed ways of “fudging” the numbers in an attempt to mislead people (who themselves are typically only really focussed on the number of carcasses).

2. SPECIFICS
2.1. Many of the tricks employed take advantage of other, well-known, geographical and organisational hindrances, such as the lack of forensic and crime-scene attendants in the park, the sheer vastness of the park, the relative unavailability of aerial assets as well as the poor communication channels and standards. Examples of ways in which the data generated by the park is erroneous and/or misleading includes:
• The assignment of carcasses to different reporting periods, e.g. an old carcass might be attributed to the previous month or even year and seeing as how most people take the previous reporting periods as static, they are not likely to request updated statistics for previous periods (i.e. the number of rhino deaths for previous years has probably increased and no-one knows about it).
• Rangers will often not assign their subordinated to areas they know have carcasses in, as they hope that after enough time no-one will find them (carcasses over a month old are very difficult to identify)
• Rangers have admitted to under-counting carcasses in the past, there have even been instances in which carcasses were deliberately moved by rangers out of sight (and therefore hopefully also “out of mind”) or they have just lied about the carcass being a natural death.
• Rangers will often also report carcasses very poorly or make “accidental mistakes” (with incorrect GPS co-ordinates, so that when teams try and fail to find the carcass, it is just written off) or intentionally find other ways to hamper the confirmation process (e.g. reassigning rangers who found the carcass, making it impossible to get follow up information on incorrect GPS and other data, etc.)
• Carcasses will be reported as dying of natural deaths despite the fact that many have no horns (often the excuse is given that hyenas or other scavengers probably took the horn). This is the easiest way for rangers to hide poached animals.
• It is often the case that due to either a lack of investigators or that that they are lazy, the carcass is never found or that the carcass is assigned as a natural death as it was too hot to do a proper search or autopsy.
• There have also been instances in which wounded rhino have been pushed or chased into neighboring reserves, thereby assigning the carcass to them and not the national park.
• Rangers also feign ignorance or do not report other variables regarding other animal deaths that might be associated to a poaching incident. For example, if a calf that was being protected by it mother (who was poached) is killed by lions, these deaths are not attributed to poaching, if a cow is in a late stage pregnancy when it is poached, the death of the almost born animal is also not attributed as a poached animal. There are many similar examples of “grey areas”.

2.2. Because of the single-minded view on carcasses as a measure of effectiveness, every section and regional ranger is incentivised to use every trick they can think of to reduce the number of carcasses in their respective sections/regions. There is no real watchdog or overseeing body. When I was in the park, I created mechanism and structures to create accountability; however, based on what I am told now, that is all gone and rangers are basically in charge of their own oversight. That is why I am so suspicious about the “reduction” in poaching that was registered the year after we left the park, despite being told by rangers informally that they are being hammered harder than ever.

2.3. All that being said, the lack of effective staff and proper accounting/auditable systems/measures at the ECI office also results in significant data disparities and inconsistencies emerging. There is no real impetus to look too closely as it creates more work for people who simply do not have the skills. The strong “community” sense between people working in national parks also makes it almost impossible for “one of their own” to “rat” on them, as they have known each other for years.

2.4. Considering how “scientific” the park is in capturing data about large mammals, I would ask what the numbers of natural deaths have been for the last 20 years. I would be willing to bet that the number of natural deaths has skyrocketed at the same rate as poaching (if not more so). There is absolutely no way of justifying this exponential growth in natural deaths. Of course it is easier to hide natural death information as an animal that died of natural causes is not a crime scene and does not have to be recorded in the same rigorous way as a poached rhino (this is another incentive, as there is less work to do for a natural death).

END