Ja, the syndicates use the same footsoldiers, just within SA. The townships bordering Kruger are an ideal refuge.
Counter Poaching Efforts
-
Richprins
- Committee Member
- Posts: 75119
- Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 3:52 pm
- Location: NELSPRUIT
- Contact:
Re: Anti-Poaching Campaigns & Initiatives
Thanks, dup!
Ja, the syndicates use the same footsoldiers, just within SA. The townships bordering Kruger are an ideal refuge.
Ja, the syndicates use the same footsoldiers, just within SA. The townships bordering Kruger are an ideal refuge.
Please check Needs Attention pre-booking: https://africawild-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=322&t=596
Re: Counter Poaching Efforts
U.S. Mulls Help for Africa to Hunt Down Wildlife Poachers
by Anthony Capaccio
June 29, 2015 — 5:00 AM CEST
U.S. intelligence agencies are considering whether to provide information, analysis and possibly tactical lessons to African governments about how to attack wildlife poaching networks, according to a top official.
“We are looking for opportunities” where “we can contribute,” Terrance Ford, the national intelligence manager for Africa in the office of Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, said in an interview last week.
“We haven’t settled on” the next opportunity, but “it’s an issue of where we can make a difference,” Ford said after speaking to an intelligence conference in Washington. “We have a role to play in this, so we are trying to do that.”
Infrared and photographic imagery from satellites and other data could help locate and track herds of animals and bands of poachers, and wildlife rangers would benefit from better equipment and by adapting some of the techniques, tactics and procedures used by military intelligence officers, said Ford and other U.S. officials.
Ford, a former Army deputy chief for intelligence and U.S. Africa Command intelligence director, said that in many respects, networks of illicit poachers and buyers resemble the terrorist networks that U.S. military intelligence has developed tools to counter.
The tools used to “understand and defeat these networks can be shared with governments and wildlife services,” he said.
These include the methods, known collectively as geospatial intelligence or “GeoInt,” used to analyze, correlate and disseminate large amounts of data “to understand relationships that are not immediately evident,” Ford said.
Unmasking Organizations
“As we focus on terrorist activities, weapons proliferation and illegal drugs, we obtain information on how the contraband is acquired, transported and sold, plus data on the organization itself and its leadership,” Ford said in his speech. “There is certain information” about networks profiting from the killings that “we’d like to share, and we do share.”
There’s increased congressional interest in harnessing the intelligence community to assist in counter-poaching. The House appropriations committee’s fiscal 2016 defense bill said trafficking, particularly of African elephant ivory, can be used as a source of funding by terrorist groups and extremist militias in central and eastern Africa.
The committee encouraged the intelligence community to “share information and analysis on transnational criminal organizations” and others “that facilitate illegal wildlife trafficking.”
Organized Crime
U.S. authorities crushed more than a ton of ivory this month in New York’s Times Square to highlight the problem of pouching. Most ivory is bound for China.
As many as 40,000 African elephants were lost to poaching in 2011, a major factor in the illegal wildlife trade that’s become the world’s fourth-largest international organized crime, according to a University of Washington study published this month by the journal Science. The wildlife trafficking market is worth an estimated $8 billion to $10 billion a year.
The study, based on DNA analysis of tusks seized from poachers, concluded that most elephants killed on a wide scale lived in southern Tanzania and northern Mozambique in east Africa or in a central African region that includes parts of Gabon, Cameroon and the Republic of Congo.
More than 1,200 rare white rhinoceros were killed in 2014 in South Africa’s Kruger National Park, compared with 13 in 2007, Kelvin Alie, a director of the International Fund For Animal Welfare, said at the forum.
“The potential is there for the U.S intelligence community to assist with anti-trafficking and anti-poaching responses,” but “it needs to be explored and exploited,” Alie said in an e-mail when asked about Ford’s remarks.
Kenyan Partnership
Ford and Alie praised a new counter-poaching partnership in Kenya called “tenBoma,” which means “Ten Houses” and is named after a Kenyan community policing philosophy.
Announced in March by the Kenyan environment ministry and the welfare fund, tenBoma intends to attack poaching networks by using better-armed Kenya Wildlife Service rangers and intense analysis of unclassified satellite imagery to stop poachers before animals are killed.
Ford called tenBoma a “a very, very creative forum” for potential intelligence community assistance to attacking poaching networks. Still, he stressed that no matter how laudable and consistent it is with U.S. policy, assisting counter-poaching competes with more pressing U.S. intelligence community priorities.
“We’re only a small part of a ‘whole-of-government effort,’ and so what we do has to be integrated into the larger U.S. government effort,” Ford said.
‘Modest Opportunity’
Ford’s presence at the panel in Washington was a reflection that the intelligence community believes “there’s a modest opportunity to contribute,” he said in the interview.
“What we’ve seen in some countries, it’s a very stove-piped effort” that doesn’t integrate all available capabilities to prevent poaching and apprehend offenders “because they don’t realize they are dealing with a network,” Ford said.
“Unless you realize it’s a network, you don’t try to tackle the network” and “you don’t make a lot of progress,” he said. Poachers, for example, just move to another location. “If it’s an issue of safeguarding this water hole, they just go to another,” he said.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ ... e-poachers
by Anthony Capaccio
June 29, 2015 — 5:00 AM CEST
U.S. intelligence agencies are considering whether to provide information, analysis and possibly tactical lessons to African governments about how to attack wildlife poaching networks, according to a top official.
“We are looking for opportunities” where “we can contribute,” Terrance Ford, the national intelligence manager for Africa in the office of Director of National Intelligence James Clapper, said in an interview last week.
“We haven’t settled on” the next opportunity, but “it’s an issue of where we can make a difference,” Ford said after speaking to an intelligence conference in Washington. “We have a role to play in this, so we are trying to do that.”
Infrared and photographic imagery from satellites and other data could help locate and track herds of animals and bands of poachers, and wildlife rangers would benefit from better equipment and by adapting some of the techniques, tactics and procedures used by military intelligence officers, said Ford and other U.S. officials.
Ford, a former Army deputy chief for intelligence and U.S. Africa Command intelligence director, said that in many respects, networks of illicit poachers and buyers resemble the terrorist networks that U.S. military intelligence has developed tools to counter.
The tools used to “understand and defeat these networks can be shared with governments and wildlife services,” he said.
These include the methods, known collectively as geospatial intelligence or “GeoInt,” used to analyze, correlate and disseminate large amounts of data “to understand relationships that are not immediately evident,” Ford said.
Unmasking Organizations
“As we focus on terrorist activities, weapons proliferation and illegal drugs, we obtain information on how the contraband is acquired, transported and sold, plus data on the organization itself and its leadership,” Ford said in his speech. “There is certain information” about networks profiting from the killings that “we’d like to share, and we do share.”
There’s increased congressional interest in harnessing the intelligence community to assist in counter-poaching. The House appropriations committee’s fiscal 2016 defense bill said trafficking, particularly of African elephant ivory, can be used as a source of funding by terrorist groups and extremist militias in central and eastern Africa.
The committee encouraged the intelligence community to “share information and analysis on transnational criminal organizations” and others “that facilitate illegal wildlife trafficking.”
Organized Crime
U.S. authorities crushed more than a ton of ivory this month in New York’s Times Square to highlight the problem of pouching. Most ivory is bound for China.
As many as 40,000 African elephants were lost to poaching in 2011, a major factor in the illegal wildlife trade that’s become the world’s fourth-largest international organized crime, according to a University of Washington study published this month by the journal Science. The wildlife trafficking market is worth an estimated $8 billion to $10 billion a year.
The study, based on DNA analysis of tusks seized from poachers, concluded that most elephants killed on a wide scale lived in southern Tanzania and northern Mozambique in east Africa or in a central African region that includes parts of Gabon, Cameroon and the Republic of Congo.
More than 1,200 rare white rhinoceros were killed in 2014 in South Africa’s Kruger National Park, compared with 13 in 2007, Kelvin Alie, a director of the International Fund For Animal Welfare, said at the forum.
“The potential is there for the U.S intelligence community to assist with anti-trafficking and anti-poaching responses,” but “it needs to be explored and exploited,” Alie said in an e-mail when asked about Ford’s remarks.
Kenyan Partnership
Ford and Alie praised a new counter-poaching partnership in Kenya called “tenBoma,” which means “Ten Houses” and is named after a Kenyan community policing philosophy.
Announced in March by the Kenyan environment ministry and the welfare fund, tenBoma intends to attack poaching networks by using better-armed Kenya Wildlife Service rangers and intense analysis of unclassified satellite imagery to stop poachers before animals are killed.
Ford called tenBoma a “a very, very creative forum” for potential intelligence community assistance to attacking poaching networks. Still, he stressed that no matter how laudable and consistent it is with U.S. policy, assisting counter-poaching competes with more pressing U.S. intelligence community priorities.
“We’re only a small part of a ‘whole-of-government effort,’ and so what we do has to be integrated into the larger U.S. government effort,” Ford said.
‘Modest Opportunity’
Ford’s presence at the panel in Washington was a reflection that the intelligence community believes “there’s a modest opportunity to contribute,” he said in the interview.
“What we’ve seen in some countries, it’s a very stove-piped effort” that doesn’t integrate all available capabilities to prevent poaching and apprehend offenders “because they don’t realize they are dealing with a network,” Ford said.
“Unless you realize it’s a network, you don’t try to tackle the network” and “you don’t make a lot of progress,” he said. Poachers, for example, just move to another location. “If it’s an issue of safeguarding this water hole, they just go to another,” he said.
http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/ ... e-poachers
-
Lisbeth
- Site Admin
- Posts: 65635
- Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:31 pm
- Country: Switzerland
- Location: Lugano
- Contact:
Re: Counter Poaching Efforts
The trouble with using synthetic rhino horn to stop poaching
In 2014, one rhino was killed every eight hours. That was in South Africa alone, where most of the world's rhinos live. At this rate, rhino deaths may overtake births by 2016-2018, making the concept of the rhino's extinction very real.
© Fotolia.com© Fotolia.com
Spurred by this grim prospect, governments, businesses and governmental organizations have discussed a wide range of solutions to stop rhino poaching, the key driver of rhino mortality.
One proposal that recently generated a lot of interest is the manufacturing of synthetic rhino horn. The concept first reached the media limelight in 2012 when the company Rhinoceros Horn LLC launched a crowdfunding campaign to get the idea off the ground. While that campaign failed, the idea has recently been rekindled by Pembient, a US-based company that describes itself as "the De Beers of synthetic wildlife products."
This bioengineering start-up plans to flood the market with synthetic 3D-printed rhino horns. The company hopes this will help save rhinos by making synthetic horns cheaper to purchase than the real thing.
Pembient is looking to develop synthetic rhino horns that not only are genetically similar but feel and smell like the real thing, so much so that consumers wouldn't be able to tell the difference. To achieve this, the company has recently embarked on a crowdfunding effort to sequence the genome of the black rhino. Pembient hopes the first synthetic horns will hit the market about a year from now.
The question, though, remains: will it work? An examination of both consumer motivations and business models behind these types of ventures exposes some pitfalls.
Bear bile and cubic zirconia
The best available consumer research tells us that demand for rhino horn stems largely from the social status this perceived luxury product gives to its users, tied to the (erroneous) beliefs of its medical properties. How would synthetic rhino horn fit into this picture?
In terms of its luxury status, it is the rarity and high price of rhino horn that give it its allure. As such, it is unlikely that current consumers will turn to cheaper and commonly available options no matter how indistinguishable they may be to a lay audience, much the same way that the availability and lower price of cubic zirconia has not led to a crash of the diamond trade. Diamonds carry a social value that while arbitrary keeps consumers willing to pay large premiums. Thus it seems unlikely that a cheaper synthetic alternative may replace the original product in the minds of the wealthy consumers driving the demand for rhino horn.
Demand for rhino horn is driven by the mistaken belief that it has medicinal properties.animalrescueblog/flickr, CC BY-NC
As far as traditional medicine goes, the push for alternative products has been tried before. Take bear bile, for example. Used in Asia for centuries as a part of traditional medicine, the trade in bear bile flourished in the 1970s with the advent of "bear farming," in which bile is obtained from live bears.
The number of bears required to fill these farms became a threat to Asian bear populations. As a result governments, NGOs and businesses have worked for decades to promote a wide range of plant, animal and synthetic substitutes. Yet, there is little sign of the practice disappearing, with a minimum of 12,000 bears still being kept in legal and illegal bear farms in Southeast Asia. Several reasons have been put forward for this, from the preference of consumers for wild products to the reluctance of practitioners to prescribe alternatives.
Biopiracy
Taking all this into account, it seems unlikely that this synthetic rhino horn will have an impact on the demand for the real deal. However, the circulation of a synthetic product that so closely resembles the real product could easily become the worst nightmare of enforcement agencies worldwide, as authorities will have a hard time distinguishing between synthetic and illegally obtained rhino horn.
Another related issue is that by making synthetic rhino horn widely available, Pembient faces some perverse incentives to perpetuate the idea that it has indeed some medical properties. After all, the company's bottom line depends on there being demand for rhino horn. This can undermine the work of conservation NGOs, traditional medicine practitioners and even governments, who have spent decades trying to break the link between rhino horn and traditional medicine.
If a Western company commercializes a product from sequencing the DNA of the black rhino, does the country of origin, which pays for conservation, benefit as well?whatsthepointsa/flickr, CC BY-SA
Beyond any potential impact this initiative may or may not have, the entire business case for this enterprise is underlined by a broader moral issue. Is it ethical for a US-based company to profit from a product based on genetic material coming from several developing countries, without a clear form of compensation?
History is riddled with cases of fortunes being made by companies in the West that have developed commercial ventures based on plants or animals from some of the world's poorest corners without any compensation, in what has become known as biopiracy. The rosy periwinkle, for example, a plant native only to Madagascar, was found to contain a chemical compound that is effective in treating several forms of cancer. Millions of dollars were made from the two drugs subsequently developed, yet no compensation was ever given to Madagascar. The list of similar cases goes on and includes the Neem tree, turmeric, basmati rice, Ayahuasca, Rooibos Tea, Quinine and Quinoa.
Cost of conservation
Rhino conservation is costly, with countries having to invest heavily in management and anti-poaching efforts. Yet rhinos are distributed across a number of developing countries with pressing needs around food security, health and education. It would be hypocritical for the international community to ban the trade in rhino horn, thus denying rhino range countries a source of revenue, while allowing private companies from elsewhere to profit from the trade in a product based on the rhino's genetic material.
It is clear that conservation is much in need of entrepreneurship and people willing to think outside of the box - just the kind of thinking that the people behind efforts to make synthetic rhino horn have demonstrated. Yet, the context around the trade in rhino horn is very complex and simple solutions that sound too good to be true often are.The Conversation
In 2014, one rhino was killed every eight hours. That was in South Africa alone, where most of the world's rhinos live. At this rate, rhino deaths may overtake births by 2016-2018, making the concept of the rhino's extinction very real.
© Fotolia.com© Fotolia.com
Spurred by this grim prospect, governments, businesses and governmental organizations have discussed a wide range of solutions to stop rhino poaching, the key driver of rhino mortality.
One proposal that recently generated a lot of interest is the manufacturing of synthetic rhino horn. The concept first reached the media limelight in 2012 when the company Rhinoceros Horn LLC launched a crowdfunding campaign to get the idea off the ground. While that campaign failed, the idea has recently been rekindled by Pembient, a US-based company that describes itself as "the De Beers of synthetic wildlife products."
This bioengineering start-up plans to flood the market with synthetic 3D-printed rhino horns. The company hopes this will help save rhinos by making synthetic horns cheaper to purchase than the real thing.
Pembient is looking to develop synthetic rhino horns that not only are genetically similar but feel and smell like the real thing, so much so that consumers wouldn't be able to tell the difference. To achieve this, the company has recently embarked on a crowdfunding effort to sequence the genome of the black rhino. Pembient hopes the first synthetic horns will hit the market about a year from now.
The question, though, remains: will it work? An examination of both consumer motivations and business models behind these types of ventures exposes some pitfalls.
Bear bile and cubic zirconia
The best available consumer research tells us that demand for rhino horn stems largely from the social status this perceived luxury product gives to its users, tied to the (erroneous) beliefs of its medical properties. How would synthetic rhino horn fit into this picture?
In terms of its luxury status, it is the rarity and high price of rhino horn that give it its allure. As such, it is unlikely that current consumers will turn to cheaper and commonly available options no matter how indistinguishable they may be to a lay audience, much the same way that the availability and lower price of cubic zirconia has not led to a crash of the diamond trade. Diamonds carry a social value that while arbitrary keeps consumers willing to pay large premiums. Thus it seems unlikely that a cheaper synthetic alternative may replace the original product in the minds of the wealthy consumers driving the demand for rhino horn.
Demand for rhino horn is driven by the mistaken belief that it has medicinal properties.animalrescueblog/flickr, CC BY-NC
As far as traditional medicine goes, the push for alternative products has been tried before. Take bear bile, for example. Used in Asia for centuries as a part of traditional medicine, the trade in bear bile flourished in the 1970s with the advent of "bear farming," in which bile is obtained from live bears.
The number of bears required to fill these farms became a threat to Asian bear populations. As a result governments, NGOs and businesses have worked for decades to promote a wide range of plant, animal and synthetic substitutes. Yet, there is little sign of the practice disappearing, with a minimum of 12,000 bears still being kept in legal and illegal bear farms in Southeast Asia. Several reasons have been put forward for this, from the preference of consumers for wild products to the reluctance of practitioners to prescribe alternatives.
Biopiracy
Taking all this into account, it seems unlikely that this synthetic rhino horn will have an impact on the demand for the real deal. However, the circulation of a synthetic product that so closely resembles the real product could easily become the worst nightmare of enforcement agencies worldwide, as authorities will have a hard time distinguishing between synthetic and illegally obtained rhino horn.
Another related issue is that by making synthetic rhino horn widely available, Pembient faces some perverse incentives to perpetuate the idea that it has indeed some medical properties. After all, the company's bottom line depends on there being demand for rhino horn. This can undermine the work of conservation NGOs, traditional medicine practitioners and even governments, who have spent decades trying to break the link between rhino horn and traditional medicine.
If a Western company commercializes a product from sequencing the DNA of the black rhino, does the country of origin, which pays for conservation, benefit as well?whatsthepointsa/flickr, CC BY-SA
Beyond any potential impact this initiative may or may not have, the entire business case for this enterprise is underlined by a broader moral issue. Is it ethical for a US-based company to profit from a product based on genetic material coming from several developing countries, without a clear form of compensation?
History is riddled with cases of fortunes being made by companies in the West that have developed commercial ventures based on plants or animals from some of the world's poorest corners without any compensation, in what has become known as biopiracy. The rosy periwinkle, for example, a plant native only to Madagascar, was found to contain a chemical compound that is effective in treating several forms of cancer. Millions of dollars were made from the two drugs subsequently developed, yet no compensation was ever given to Madagascar. The list of similar cases goes on and includes the Neem tree, turmeric, basmati rice, Ayahuasca, Rooibos Tea, Quinine and Quinoa.
Cost of conservation
Rhino conservation is costly, with countries having to invest heavily in management and anti-poaching efforts. Yet rhinos are distributed across a number of developing countries with pressing needs around food security, health and education. It would be hypocritical for the international community to ban the trade in rhino horn, thus denying rhino range countries a source of revenue, while allowing private companies from elsewhere to profit from the trade in a product based on the rhino's genetic material.
It is clear that conservation is much in need of entrepreneurship and people willing to think outside of the box - just the kind of thinking that the people behind efforts to make synthetic rhino horn have demonstrated. Yet, the context around the trade in rhino horn is very complex and simple solutions that sound too good to be true often are.The Conversation
"Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world." Nelson Mandela
The desire for equality must never exceed the demands of knowledge
The desire for equality must never exceed the demands of knowledge
-
Richprins
- Committee Member
- Posts: 75119
- Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 3:52 pm
- Location: NELSPRUIT
- Contact:
Re: Counter Poaching Efforts
Well, the article must decide whether people are going to refuse to buy the horn, or whether they are going to make the Western Developer rich? 
Please check Needs Attention pre-booking: https://africawild-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=322&t=596
-
Flutterby
- Posts: 44029
- Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:28 pm
- Country: South Africa
- Location: Gauteng, South Africa
- Contact:
Re: Counter Poaching Efforts
KNP Rangers receive advanced night-vision equipment
Today (9 July 2015), the Kruger National Park (KNP)’s ranger corps received a collection of top-of-the-range monocular night-vision equipment to the combined value of R3.4 million from Peace Parks Foundation, in order to assist them in their efforts to combat wildlife crime.
Said Peace Parks Foundation (PPF) CEO, Werner Myburgh; “Field rangers remain the most critical first line of defence on the ground against rhino poaching. With most incursions happening at night, and as criminal syndicates become more and more sophisticated in terms of their tactics and equipment, Peace Parks Foundation is proud to assist South African National Parks in levelling the playing field with advanced technology that not only ensures a safer working environment for the rangers but also keeps them one step ahead of the poachers.”
Night vision has become a key opto-electronic technology in modern conflicts that take place in the dark. The new equipment allows for thermal imaging and high quality depth perception, whilst offering a comfortable and ergonomic size and shape.
Major-General Johan Jooste, who heads up Kruger National Park’s counter-poaching activities, welcomed the contribution: “This generous contribution of such a large quantity of much needed night-vision gear will help rangers throughout the park to gain the advantage and be pro-active, thus not only saving rhinos, but also safeguarding themselves. The equipment can be seen as a force multiplier that makes the ranger more effective and the same number of people can have a greater effect. We salute the PPF as a valuable ally in our rhino campaign.”
The contribution from Peace Parks Foundation also includes training sessions so as to teach the rangers how to most effectively utilize the night-vision equipment for their specific needs within the unique Kruger National Park environment.
Through its Rhino Protection Programme (RPP), Peace Parks Foundation supports various projects that aim to stop or deter illegal activities on the ground – i.e. at the frontlines of the poaching war; destabilise and interrupt the supply chain through interventions such as intelligence operations; as well as efforts to reduce market demand for illegally traded rhino products. The RPP is implemented under the auspices of the South African Department of Environmental Affairs in partnership with South African National Parks and Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife. The roll-out of the multi-faceted programme is made possible through funding from the Dutch and Swedish postcode lotteries and various other private donors and foundations.
Issued jointly by
Peace Parks Foundation and South African National Parks - Kruger National Park
Media enquiries either:
William Mabasa, GM: Communications & Marketing, Kruger National Park. Contact: Tel: 013 735 4363, cell: 082 807 3919 or email: william.mabasa@sanparks.org
Or
Lise-Marie Greeff-Villet, Communications Coordinator – Peace Parks Foundation. Contact: Tel: 021 880 5125 or email: lgreeff-villet@ppf.org.za
Today (9 July 2015), the Kruger National Park (KNP)’s ranger corps received a collection of top-of-the-range monocular night-vision equipment to the combined value of R3.4 million from Peace Parks Foundation, in order to assist them in their efforts to combat wildlife crime.
Said Peace Parks Foundation (PPF) CEO, Werner Myburgh; “Field rangers remain the most critical first line of defence on the ground against rhino poaching. With most incursions happening at night, and as criminal syndicates become more and more sophisticated in terms of their tactics and equipment, Peace Parks Foundation is proud to assist South African National Parks in levelling the playing field with advanced technology that not only ensures a safer working environment for the rangers but also keeps them one step ahead of the poachers.”
Night vision has become a key opto-electronic technology in modern conflicts that take place in the dark. The new equipment allows for thermal imaging and high quality depth perception, whilst offering a comfortable and ergonomic size and shape.
Major-General Johan Jooste, who heads up Kruger National Park’s counter-poaching activities, welcomed the contribution: “This generous contribution of such a large quantity of much needed night-vision gear will help rangers throughout the park to gain the advantage and be pro-active, thus not only saving rhinos, but also safeguarding themselves. The equipment can be seen as a force multiplier that makes the ranger more effective and the same number of people can have a greater effect. We salute the PPF as a valuable ally in our rhino campaign.”
The contribution from Peace Parks Foundation also includes training sessions so as to teach the rangers how to most effectively utilize the night-vision equipment for their specific needs within the unique Kruger National Park environment.
Through its Rhino Protection Programme (RPP), Peace Parks Foundation supports various projects that aim to stop or deter illegal activities on the ground – i.e. at the frontlines of the poaching war; destabilise and interrupt the supply chain through interventions such as intelligence operations; as well as efforts to reduce market demand for illegally traded rhino products. The RPP is implemented under the auspices of the South African Department of Environmental Affairs in partnership with South African National Parks and Ezemvelo KZN Wildlife. The roll-out of the multi-faceted programme is made possible through funding from the Dutch and Swedish postcode lotteries and various other private donors and foundations.
Issued jointly by
Peace Parks Foundation and South African National Parks - Kruger National Park
Media enquiries either:
William Mabasa, GM: Communications & Marketing, Kruger National Park. Contact: Tel: 013 735 4363, cell: 082 807 3919 or email: william.mabasa@sanparks.org
Or
Lise-Marie Greeff-Villet, Communications Coordinator – Peace Parks Foundation. Contact: Tel: 021 880 5125 or email: lgreeff-villet@ppf.org.za
-
Lisbeth
- Site Admin
- Posts: 65635
- Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 12:31 pm
- Country: Switzerland
- Location: Lugano
- Contact:
Re: Counter Poaching Efforts
What a great contribution 
Should be of great help
If the poaching does not decrease soon, with all the new material received, there is something serious not working!
Should be of great help If the poaching does not decrease soon, with all the new material received, there is something serious not working!
"Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world." Nelson Mandela
The desire for equality must never exceed the demands of knowledge
The desire for equality must never exceed the demands of knowledge
-
Richprins
- Committee Member
- Posts: 75119
- Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 3:52 pm
- Location: NELSPRUIT
- Contact:
Re: Counter Poaching Efforts
Very good news!
Please check Needs Attention pre-booking: https://africawild-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=322&t=596
Re: Counter Poaching Efforts
Read here about Drones in HiP and some general issues in the communities
http://venturesafrica.com/features/goin ... xtinction/
http://venturesafrica.com/features/goin ... xtinction/
-
nan
- Posts: 26457
- Joined: Thu May 31, 2012 9:41 pm
- Country: Switzerland
- Location: Central Europe
- Contact:
Re: Counter Poaching Efforts
hope all will work as per the expectations
Kgalagadi lover… for ever
https://safrounet.piwigo.com/
https://safrounet.piwigo.com/
-
Richprins
- Committee Member
- Posts: 75119
- Joined: Sat May 19, 2012 3:52 pm
- Location: NELSPRUIT
- Contact:
Re: Counter Poaching Efforts
Very good article!
I like this part:
The UAVs’ nighttime lights often scare off poachers. “We did a one-week stint in Tembe Elephant Park, which is on the border with Mozambique, where we could see poachers running back into Mozambique when we flew over them,”
Please check Needs Attention pre-booking: https://africawild-forum.com/viewtopic.php?f=322&t=596