The Unpopular Strategy Used by Namibia to Save Rhino's

When it comes to wildlife conservation, protecting endangered species often involves making difficult choices. 

One such example is the dehorning of rhinos - a practice that began in Namibia in the late 1980s and early 1990s as an effort to curb the alarming rise in poaching. 

In a surprising outcome, during that period, not a single dehorned rhino was poached, showcasing the potential of this bold strategy.

But why would conservationists remove what most of us consider the rhino’s defining feature? 

The answer is in the importance of the Rhino's horn for poachers. 

Rhino poaching surged due to the high value of their horns on the black market, primarily driven by demand in some Asian countries where rhino horn is used in traditional medicine. 

To counter this, dehorning emerged as a preventative measure to make rhinos less attractive targets for poachers.

The process itself is complex and invasive. 

Rhinos are typically darted from a helicopter, sedated, and then carefully dehorned using chainsaws or hand saws while under anesthesia. 

About 90-93% of the horn mass is removed, leaving a small stub to avoid damaging the germinal layer at the base, which would otherwise prevent regrowth or cause deformities.

However, dehorning isn’t a silver bullet. 

While it can deter poaching when coupled with strong security and anti-poaching measures, it has limitations. Poachers may still target dehorned rhinos for the remaining horn stubs or out of frustration and vengeance to avoid tracking them again later. 

Also, if dehorning isn’t publicly communicated, poachers may not know which rhinos have been dehorned until they’ve already shot them.

Beyond security concerns, there’s also the debate about the biological and ecological roles of the horn. 

Rhinos use their horns for defending territories, protecting their young, foraging, and social dominance. 

While studies, such as one conducted in Namibia in 2022, have shown that dehorning didn’t significantly impact population productivity, it can still influence individual rhinos’ behaviour, especially males competing for territory.

Dehorning is costly and requires significant resources for recurring operations, as the horn grows back over time, involving repeat procedures every 12-24 months. 

The expense, coupled with the risks associated with sedation and surgery, makes this a challenging practice to maintain on a large scale. 

For instance, it’s estimated that a full dehorning of the rhino population in Kruger National Park would cost upto $8.8 million.

Despite these challenges, dehorning remains one of the tools in the conservationist’s arsenal, particularly in regions facing severe poaching threats. 

It’s a stark reminder of the lengths to which we must go to protect endangered species and the complex decisions that come with it.

This article was written by our quizmaster Surya Narayanan.