THE RHINO WAR Rhino Horn Demand Reduction

Andrew Paterson

Two Fronts of the Rhino War

1. FRONT LINES: The reactive, physical campaign against poaching on the ground in Africa & Asia 2. BEHIND THE LINES: The proactive, mental campaign against ignorance, superstition and criminal greed in the hearts & minds of the people at the source of the demand in Asia in general – and Vietnam in particular – through an effective RHDR campaign

Japan

• 1970’s: Japan #1 consumer in Asia • 1980: ratified CITES • Min. Health ordered manufacturers to find

substites (saiga antelope horn, etc.) • RHDR campaign • Japan no longer a user

South Korea

• 1980’s: Trade shifted to South Korea • 1983: Import ban & RHDR implemented • US sanctions threat: Pelly Amendment to the

Fisherman’s Protection Act (1967) • Min. Health removed rhino horn from the

official Korean Pharmacopoeia • 1993: ratified CITES • Korea no longer a user

Taiwan

• Mid-80’s – mid-90’s: Taiwan #1 Asian consumer • Peak: Zimbabwe lost most of its rhino • US sanctions threat: Pelly Amendment to the

Fisherman’s Protection Act (1967) • 1985: Import ban but no RHDR strategy • Min. Health commissioned double-blind

randomised clinical trials to study efficacy • Deemed rhino was not worth using • 1992: Banned & removed from pharmacopeia • 1995: Taiwan no longer a user

Yemen

• 1970’s & 80’s: returning Saudi oilfield workers • Ancient tradition: Jambiya dagger handles • Joined CITES & implemented ban • Upgraded Environmental Protection Agency • Public awareness RHDR campaign • Substitues of wood and graphite accepted • Current economic downturn & war • Yemen eradicated a centuries-old tradition

China

• 1970’s & 80’s: Minor consumer • 1981: Joined CITES and banned imports • 1988: Exports banned • 1990’s: trade became more active (no RHDR) • 1993: Domestic trade prohibited • Pop. 1.38bn: 0.5% = 7,000,000 potential users • 2012: WildAid campaign – 33% awareness • 2014: 50% awareness

18-year Hiatus

• Mid-1990’s: All major traditional consumer countries had rhino trade bans in place

• Demand reduction strategies working • 1990 – 2007: SA lost an average of 12.3 rhino

per year • 2006: Enter Vietnam • Urban legend about cancer (Gen. Giap d.2013) • 92m pop: Less than 0.5% users = 460,000

Enter Vietnam

Vietnam: Brand New Myths

• Prior 2006: Almost zero consumption • Minor TCM use to treat a vague range of

ailments: high fever, convulsions, epilepsy • “Cold” animal (cooling, calming, not “heaty”) • Touts in hospitals – cancer cure • Detoxicant for chaemotherapy drugs • Morphed into a general detoxicant • Expensive social status symbol

One-sided Rhino War

• Not trying to overturn ancient traditions • Not trying to overturn TCM • Lixin Huang (Pres. Council of Colleges of

Acupuncture & Oriental Medicine) • Overturning brand new myths (under 10-yr) • Fads change: Social Status Symbols shift • HUGE focus the reactive, physical war • Very little spent on the proactive, mental war

Vietnam

• Concept of ‘face’ (shaming) • Celebrities speaking out • SA’s mixed message damaging efforts • 2014: HSI setback (38% claim) • ENV: Govt. excuse claiming problem down • 2015: Breaking the Brand • Vietnam: 460,000 vs. China: 7,000,000 pot. • Even ancient traditions can be changed…

Yu chi

• China: ‘Conspicuous consumption delicacy’ • 968AD (1,047 years ago) Sung Dynasty, China • Tradition: prosperity, honour, good fortune • 2000: $10 to $2,000/serving • 2000: 40% - 99% decline (14 species) • 2000: 75% consumers unaware of source • 2000: 19% believed it grew back • 2001: Countries started banning (25 signed)

2006 Campaign

• Jackie Chan, Yao Ming, Li Bing Bing, Maggie Q • “When the buying stops the killing can too!” • Broadcast & SatTV, PSA’s, Social Media • 2013: China & HK ban at state banquets • 2014: 85% of Chinese consumers had stopped 82% decline in sales (China) 47% decline in Retail Sales Price (China) 57% decline in Wholesale Distribution Price (China) 80% decline in Wholesale Supplier Price (Indonesia)

Shark Fin Soup

• WildAid: Shark Fin Soup Demand Reduction • Yu chi = ‘fish wing’ (ignorance of source) • +1,000-year entrenched cultural tradition • Reason #1: Awareness campaign • Reason #2: Want to protect sharks • Reason #3: Killing by finning is cruel • $164m in pro bono media placements • Shark Fin War won in 8 years!

2013 VN Delegation Col. Nguyen Viet Tien Vice.Chief Hanoi Police (Environment)

Mr. Vo Tuan Nanh (Nat. Ass. Member) Dep.Chair Science, Tech & Environmt.

2013 Delegation Mr. Bac Comedian & TV Celebrity

Mr. Hoang Environmental Journalist, Lao Dong

2013-09-16 (Johannesburg Press Conference): Mr. Nanh & Col. Tien acknowledge Vietnam’s leading role of the supply of rhino horn to Asia

Hanoi 2013

SA’s Mixed Message Col. Nguyen Viet Tien Vice Chief (Environmental Division) September 2013, SA & Hanoi:

“If SA is trying to save rhino why is it legal to kill them and keep the horn?” “It is very hard to motivate my officers to take action against traders if you SA’s cannot decide what you want and the trade may be legalised in the future anyway.” “We have enough problems trying to stop the trade in our own endangered animals, all of which are illegal to trade in, without this extra confusion about your African rhino” “If SA legalises the trade with VN how will we differentiate between legal and illegal horns. Certificates will be forged and every horn will become legal overnight.” “Vietnam wil have to change it’s laws to make this possible. This is very confusing.” “It is hard to take you SA’s seriously”

ENV Research

• Legalising trade will compromise enforcement • Very difficult to regulate (laundering) • Sep 2014: Forest Protection Departments

(FPD’s – main wildlife protection bodies) • over 80% surveyed against trade in all

endangered species, including rhino • Unable to differentiate between legal & illegal • Wildlife laundering common among farmers

2014 Delegation Hong Nhung Vietnamese Singer

Mr. Anh V.Chief, Anti-Smuggling (VN Customs)

2014 Delegation Media

Xuan Bac & Hong Nhung

2015 Delegation

Hong Nhung & Media Contingent Biệt Đội Tê Giác (Rhino Squad)

The way forward

• 2 years into an 8-year plan • WildAid, Wilderness Foundation, Wildlands Cons. • Very little focus, money & support in SA • Pro Trade vs. RHDR: a direct conflict of interests • 23 March 2015: Imp. Plan to the MoU with China

includes “ideas on demand reduction” (EM) • Local communities: talk vs. concrete action • Tourism Tax: private owners + local communities • SA a Divided house: helping to drive the trade • 2016: CITES will not allow trade – stand together

Rhino Horn Demand Reduction

“This Rhino War will not be won in Africa by

Africans alone. It will be won in Asia by Asians - and by the Vietnamese in particular -

who will reduce and eventually end the demand for rhino horn at home”

Andrew Paterson