Endangered black rhino killed by hunter who paid $350,000 for permit
![Picture](/uploads/5/1/5/7/51573895/1432151538_3.png)
Bob Knudsen News Examiner
There are fewer than 5,000 black rhinos left in the world -- thanks primarily to poaching -- and one more fell to a hunter’s bullet on May 19. This kill, however, was completely legal and sanctioned by several international groups and organizations, including the United States. Corey Knowlton of Texas won a highly controversial $350,000 auction last year which raised the hackles of many conservation groups worldwide thanks to the nature of the prize.
The prize, of course, was the right to hunt one of the endangered rhinos in Namibia. The permit actually came from the Namibian Ministry of Environment and Tourism and was aimed at reducing the number of older male rhinos in the population in an effort to help population growth. The money will go to the Namibian conservation effort for the rhinos. But the method by which they underwent this particular operation has raised many questions and concerns from people worldwide.
In fact, the rancor following the auction was so severe that Knowlton had to hire security for the death threats he was receiving. Knowlton, who is no stranger to hunting, found himself in the peculiar position of being the hunted. Knowlton, however, believes that by hunting this creature, he is actually doing more to save the animals than most others are.
"I felt like from day one it was something benefiting the black rhino," Knowlton said. "Being on this hunt, with the amount of criticism it brought and the amount of praise it brought from both sides, I don't think it could have brought more awareness to the black rhino."
But critics see it very differently. The North American Regional Director of the International Fund for Animal Welfare Jeffrey Flocken says in his CNN editorial that the practice “does not make sense morally, economically, biologically, or from a conservation-incentive point of view.” He also points out that the types of benefits that Knowlton claims are exaggerated at best, and that they can actually encourage more poaching because it shows that there is, in fact, a market for the hunting of the endangered rhinos.
Knowlton himself acknowledged that the hunt could have gone wrong in a number of ways, not the least of which being that he could have shot the wrong rhino. "If it charges at us and we are already sure it's the right one, we are going to kill it," Knowlton said. "If we aren't sure if it's the right one, we are going to try and get out of the way. If we don't feel like we can get out of the way, we got to kill it."
In other words, Knowlton paid $350,000 for the right to kill an endangered animal for its own good. During that process, he was provoking the animals into defending themselves, for which he would kill them, whether it was the “right one” or not. And he was doing all of this because he believed that it would help the long term survival of the species, despite the protests of experts who say it would actually be harmful for a number of reasons.
Sounds more like Knowlton wanted a fancy trophy and was able to pony up enough dough to make it happen. Couching it in questionable rhetoric doesn’t make it any better.
There are fewer than 5,000 black rhinos left in the world -- thanks primarily to poaching -- and one more fell to a hunter’s bullet on May 19. This kill, however, was completely legal and sanctioned by several international groups and organizations, including the United States. Corey Knowlton of Texas won a highly controversial $350,000 auction last year which raised the hackles of many conservation groups worldwide thanks to the nature of the prize.
The prize, of course, was the right to hunt one of the endangered rhinos in Namibia. The permit actually came from the Namibian Ministry of Environment and Tourism and was aimed at reducing the number of older male rhinos in the population in an effort to help population growth. The money will go to the Namibian conservation effort for the rhinos. But the method by which they underwent this particular operation has raised many questions and concerns from people worldwide.
In fact, the rancor following the auction was so severe that Knowlton had to hire security for the death threats he was receiving. Knowlton, who is no stranger to hunting, found himself in the peculiar position of being the hunted. Knowlton, however, believes that by hunting this creature, he is actually doing more to save the animals than most others are.
"I felt like from day one it was something benefiting the black rhino," Knowlton said. "Being on this hunt, with the amount of criticism it brought and the amount of praise it brought from both sides, I don't think it could have brought more awareness to the black rhino."
But critics see it very differently. The North American Regional Director of the International Fund for Animal Welfare Jeffrey Flocken says in his CNN editorial that the practice “does not make sense morally, economically, biologically, or from a conservation-incentive point of view.” He also points out that the types of benefits that Knowlton claims are exaggerated at best, and that they can actually encourage more poaching because it shows that there is, in fact, a market for the hunting of the endangered rhinos.
Knowlton himself acknowledged that the hunt could have gone wrong in a number of ways, not the least of which being that he could have shot the wrong rhino. "If it charges at us and we are already sure it's the right one, we are going to kill it," Knowlton said. "If we aren't sure if it's the right one, we are going to try and get out of the way. If we don't feel like we can get out of the way, we got to kill it."
In other words, Knowlton paid $350,000 for the right to kill an endangered animal for its own good. During that process, he was provoking the animals into defending themselves, for which he would kill them, whether it was the “right one” or not. And he was doing all of this because he believed that it would help the long term survival of the species, despite the protests of experts who say it would actually be harmful for a number of reasons.
Sounds more like Knowlton wanted a fancy trophy and was able to pony up enough dough to make it happen. Couching it in questionable rhetoric doesn’t make it any better.