NAMIBIA’s proposals to lift the ban on the international trade in black and white rhino horns have been rejected at a key conservation meeting.
The result of the voting at the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (Cites) earlier this week was adopted by the conference on Thursday in Samarkand, Uzbekistan.
Namibia had also proposed overturning the ban on African savanna elephant ivory – this too was defeated.
Eyebrows were raised about the rhino horn trade proposals mainly because Namibia pioneered the practice of cutting the horns off rhinos in 1989 so they no longer have value for poachers.
Dehorning was followed by other southern African countries, such as Zimbabwe, Eswatini and South Africa.
Rhino horns are prized in traditional Asian medicine and are also status symbols in China, Vietnam, and some other south-east Asian countries.
Namibia tabled two separate proposals – one for black rhinos and the other for southern white rhino.
Both were resoundingly defeated, with only around 30 votes out of about 120 in favour.
Cites regulations require a two-thirds majority for a proposal to be adopted.
Black rhinos are listed as a critically endangered species by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN). In 2023, there were only 6,421 alive – a decline of more than 90% since 1960, according to an IUCN report.
The southern white rhinos are not in quite such danger – they are listed as near threatened, with a population of 15,752. But this is down 11% since 2023 and at its lowest point since the current rhino poaching crisis began nearly two decades ago.
Cites banned the trade in the horns and other rhino parts in 1977 but their poaching continued with more than 8,000 lost in the last decade, according to Save the Rhino International.
In Namibia, the number of rhinos poached was the highest on record in 2022, with 87 killed – almost twice as many as the year before, government data shows.
Although this was the first time that Namibia tabled the two proposals seeking the lifting of the ban on the rhino horn trade, the country has backed similar proposals by other southern African countries including South Africa, Eswatini and Zimbabwe in the past.
Experts say the main reason these countries want the ban to be lifted is because of the huge stockpiles of rhino horns they have amassed over the years.
“Namibia and other pro-trade rhino range states have amassed large stockpiles of rhino horn they wish to trade,” Taylor Tench, senior wildlife policy analyst with the Environmental Investigation Agency, told the BBC.
“Namibia’s stockpiles are an estimated 6.45 tonnes of white rhino horn and an estimated 4.6 tonnes of black rhino horn. South Africa, on the other hand, likely has at least four times as much.”
The main reason why these countries have rapidly growing stockpiles of horns is believed to be the dehorning programme.
The idea is that if a rhino does not have a horn, it is of no value to poachers and so won’t be killed.
The horn is removed above the growth plate, just like humans cut their nails, which means it is painless.
But it also means that the horns grow back and need to be sawed off repeatedly.
As a result their stockpiles are rapidly accumulating.
“The reason for not destroying the horn is speculative stockpiling, by both governments and private individuals,” said Mr Tench.
“Some countries, like Kenya, destroy their rhino horn stockpiles, while others, like Namibia and South Africa, stockpile the horn in the hopes of cashing in if international trade is ever legalised.”
The governments of both countries have been approached for comment.