How to move a rhino
Barely feeling the tranquiliser shot, the panic-stricken female rhinoceros ran to take shelter in a wooded area, eluding the low-flying helicopter trying to prevent her escape.
The rhino was supposed to be transferred to another park in Kenya on Saturday, but outsmarted the humans.
A few minutes later, rangers in 4x4 vehicles searched through thickets too dense for the crane truck that was meant to carry her away.
A decision was quickly made to administer the antidote to the tranquilise to prevent her from collapsing. If she fell the wrong way, she could suffocate.
The young female will therefore remain where she was born.
"The rhino is the worst one to translocate," said Taru Sheldrick, who was piloting the helicopter in Nakuru National Park in northwest Kenya, an oasis of greenery surrounding a deep blue lake.
"When you dart them, if you don't have long enough, they're running straight for thick bush, which is their security," he said.
"Whenever you're darting a rhino, you have a little bit of fear. Because it's a species in danger. Every animal is just so important."
Rhinos, which can weigh up to two tonnes, were once abundant in sub-Saharan Africa. But hunting by European colonisers and later large-scale poaching pushed them to the brink of extinction.
- Race against time -
The International Rhino Foundation (IRF) says there are about 28,000 left in the world, nearly 24,000 in Africa.
Kenya is home to more than 2,000 of them.
Rhinos reproduce less efficiently if too many of its kin live in the same location, according to the Kenya Wildlife Service (KWS), which manages the country's parks.
Moving them is therefore important, but rhinos are vulnerable to tranquilisers that slow their breathing, increase their body temperature and affect their heart rate, said Dr Dominic Mijele from KWS.
So it is a race against time as soon as a veterinarian, aboard a helicopter, administers the drug using a dart gun.
Five to seven minutes after injection, the rhino begins to feel groggy.
Then it collapses, as AFP observed on Saturday: after the first female retreated into the bush, three other black rhinos were anaesthetised within the span of a few hours in Nakuru.
A rescue team arrived on-site within two minutes of each shot, moving like a well-oiled machine.
About a dozen caregivers surrounded the animals, spraying them with water to cool their body temperature, rolling them onto their sides to ensure their respiration was not obstructed, administering oxygen and monitoring their vital signs.
Simultaneously, several other rangers secured the animals with straps threaded through the transport cage and attached to the front bumper of a jeep.
Fifteen minutes after the rescue team's arrival, the antidote was administered.
The animal then jolted to its feet and was promptly guided into a cage, which a crane loaded onto the flatbed of a truck.
- 'Number one' -
Mijele boasted of Kenya's unmatched expertise.
"We are number one in the world. We have done so many rhino translocations successfully," he said.
Jochen Zeitz, the owner of the private Segera Reserve, where about 20 rhinos have been relocated in the past two weeks, could not hide his relief after the latest operation.
On his 200 square kilometres of land, elephants, buffalos, lions, leopards, cheetahs and more roam freely, said the former Puma CEO and current Harley-Davidson executive.
But the reserve lacked "this iconic species" which were present up until 60 years ago in Segera, but have since disappeared.
Welcoming rhinos back is "completing the conservation work that we've done as a foundation over the last 22 years" since acquiring the land, he told AFP.
Due to the high risk of poaching for their horns, security measures had to be significantly enhanced with 100-150 new security staff, Zeitz said.
Late Saturday, a small group witnessed the release of the three rhinos from Nakuru, who had arrived in Segera after a six-hour drive.
In the dense night darkness, they listened as the metal bars of the transport cages were removed, doors creaked open, and heavy stomping accompanied by guttural growls rang out.
The rhinos had finally arrived at their new home.
jf/er/cw
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
News24
3 hours ago
- News24
Graphs that paint the picture of HIV in SA
Eight million people are living with HIV with more than six million being on treatment. Behind these big numbers lurk a universe of fascinating epidemiological dynamics. In this special briefing, Spotlight editor Marcus Low unpacks what we know about the state of HIV in South Africa. This is part 1 of 3. Four decades ago, hardly anyone in South Africa had HIV. Today, roughly one in eight people here are living with the virus. HIV has quite simply become a routine part of life in South Africa. But thanks to the fact that antiretroviral treatment is keeping several million people alive, HIV is no longer the crisis it was at the turn of the century. For many, the virus is still an all-too-real part of their lives. It still ranks among the country's top killers. As we will see in this Spotlight special briefing, there is good and bad news. We have made massive progress in our collective fight against HIV, especially since around 2008. But, as positive as the big picture may be, there are also reasons to be worried. In the 10 sections of this special briefing, we have used lots of graphs and an interactive table to liven things up. We have drawn almost entirely on estimates from Thembisa, the leading mathematical model of HIV in South Africa and also the basis for UNAIDS' country numbers. The big picture Total PLHIV in SA Graphic: Spotlight South Africa has the world's biggest HIV epidemic. Eight million people, or 12.8% of the population, lived with the virus in 2024. Despite the massive progress we've made in the last 20 years, this absolute number has kept increasing, and, at least by this measure, the epidemic has kept getting bigger. But while more people are living with HIV, dramatically fewer people are dying of HIV-related causes than two decades ago - we've gone from 281 000 HIV-related deaths in 2005/06 to 53 000 in 2023/24. This is mainly because antiretroviral medicines have kept several million people alive who would otherwise now be dead. The rate of new infections has also declined a lot, as shown in the above graph. South Africa's HIV epidemic is closely entwined with our tuberculosis (TB) epidemic. This is because untreated HIV breaks down the immune system, which then makes people vulnerable to falling ill with TB. Accordingly, TB is the top cause of HIV-related deaths in South Africa. Recovering life expectancy Just what a big deal HIV has been in South Africa is clear from estimates of life expectancy in the country. As HIV killed more and more people through the nineties and early 2000s, life expectancy dropped precipitously from 63.2 in 1990 to 53.2 in 2004. But then, as antiretroviral treatment started keeping more and more people alive, it increased again. It stood at 66.1 in 2024. Graphic: Spotlight There is much history that is not captured in this graph. Perhaps most notably, the introduction of antiretroviral treatment in South Africa's public sector was intentionally delayed by the state's policy of Aids denialism under then-president Thabo Mbeki. While the dramatic improvement from 2005 onward is impressive, life expectancy didn't have to drop as low as it did in the first place. The blip you can see on the right of the graph is a result of the Covid-19 pandemic. While significant, the broader trend is driven by HIV and the recovery from HIV. A massive treatment programme Of the eight million people living with HIV in South Africa, about 6.2 million or roughly four in five, were on treatment in 2024. This means South Africa has the world's most extensive HIV treatment programme by some distance. We take it somewhat for granted these days, but to treat so many people is a tremendous success story for which many healthcare workers, activists, government officials, donors, and others deserve great credit. That said, it is concerning that about one in five people with the virus are not on treatment. Treatment is recommended for everyone living with the virus. Though we focus on treatment coverage here, these numbers are often split further into the UNAIDS 95-95-95 targets. READ | Trump's HIV funding cuts will hit diabetes and cervical cancer treatment hard. Here's why In 2024, 95% of people living with HIV had been diagnosed, 81.5% of those diagnosed were on treatment, and 92% of those on treatment were virally suppressed - meaning the amount of virus in their blood was below a low threshold. The key takeaway from these numbers is that the most significant gap in South Africa's HIV response is in helping people who have already been diagnosed to start and stay on treatment. *Check back tomorrow for part 2 of this series. You can also find the complete version of this #InTheSpotlight special briefing as a single page on the Spotlight website. Note: All of the above graphs are based on outputs from version 4.8 of the Thembisa model published in March 2025. We thank the Thembisa team for sharing their outputs so freely. Graphs were produced by Spotlight using the R package ggplot2. You are free to reuse and republish the graphs. For ease of use, you can download them as a Microsoft PowerPoint slide deck. Technical note: The Thembisa model outputs include both stock and flow variables. This is why we have at some places written 2024 (for stock variables) and 2023/2024 (for flow variables). 2024 should be read as mid-2024. 2023/2024 should be read as the period from mid-2023 to mid-2024.
Yahoo
5 hours ago
- Yahoo
Opinion - Endangered species deserve a home, too
The elusive Northern Spotted Owl. The majestic Whooping Crane. Charismatic Florida panthers and beloved Monarch butterflies. These and many other endangered species now face even graver threats in the wake of two recent developments in the world of conservation. On Apr. 7, the billion-dollar biotech firm Colossal announced the 'de-extinction' of the dire wolf, a canine species that vanished in the Late Pleistocene (approximately 13,000 years ago). And on Apr. 17, the Trump administration revealed its intention to weaken decades-old endangered species protections by redefining a key word: harm. This narrower definition effectively rescinds protection of an endangered species' habitat, limiting harm to actions that 'directly' harass, injure or kill organisms. What these two developments have in common is a disregard for the vital connection that exists between species and the places they call home. Habitat refers to the place where an organism naturally or normally lives. Removal of habitat protection opens the door to logging, development and extraction of oil and minerals. The proposed definition of harm could convert fragile wetlands into farmland, migration corridors into freeways and nesting sites into beachfront property — and none of this would qualify as harm to the creatures who live there. A habitat includes the specific resources and conditions that a given species needs to survive — the plants or animals it feeds on, and particular features of topography, soil, climate and water. Some species are especially vulnerable to extinction because they require a very rare or specific type of habitat. Others are at risk because they range across several. Many butterfly species, for example, are reliant on a single host plant for every stage of their life cycle — mating, laying eggs and feeding their young. Even plants closely related to the host plant cannot replace these vital functions, however indistinguishable they may appear to the human eye. Migratory creatures, meanwhile, depend upon many habitats in far-flung geographic locations. A recent study found that approximately half of all migratory species are in decline. Annually, billions of migratory birds crisscross state and national boundaries, with varying degrees of legal protections for the places where they nest, feed or rest. Further erosion of habitat protection could be the death knell for these and other vulnerable species. Were species not so intimately tied to their environments, it might make sense to regard lab-created or genetically engineered organisms, like the recently unveiled dire wolves, as suitable replacements for endangered or extinct species. Conservation would be akin to curating museum or zoo specimens, with living representatives of endangered species, or mere samples of their genetic material, maintained in artificial environments. Disregard for the importance of habitat is evident in the fanfare over Colossal's so-called dire wolves — more accurately, grey wolves with dire wolf DNA spliced into their genome. Consider that in their original Pleistocene environments, true dire wolves preyed upon large herbivorous megafauna that are now extinct: sloths, mastodons, giant bison and camels. By contrast, Remus, Romulus and Khaleesi, the telegenic trio of fluffy white wolves created by Colossal, will live their entire lives in a highly secured, undisclosed site, subsisting on a hand-fed diet of ground meats and kibble. In short, the same flawed logic lies behind the dire wolf 'de-extinction' and the Trump proposal to redefine harm: Both treat species as if they live in a vacuum. Doug Burgum, the Trump-appointed secretary of the Interior, exemplified this sort of thinking when he took to social media to hail de-extinction as the 'bedrock' of future conservation, arguing simultaneously for re-think of endangered species protections: 'It has been innovation—not regulation—that has spawned American greatness,' he said. Citing Colossal's breakthrough, Burgum questioned the need for an endangered species list. Ten days later, the administration moved to weaken endangered species regulation by excluding habitat from the definition of harm. Yet, habitat loss remains the primary culprit of species endangerment and extinction. While these losses can occur naturally through periodic events like fires or earthquakes, the vast majority of habitat degradation, fragmentation and loss stems from human activity: land development, deforestation, large-scale agriculture, air and water pollution, and human-caused climate change, among other factors. Even amid intensified political polarization, endangered species protection is wildly popular, with 84 percent of Americans supporting the Endangered Species Act. In the past month, some 350,000 members of the public weighed in to protest changes to the act. Many offered the commonsense argument that destroying the home of any living being, human or nonhuman, clearly constitutes harm, as surely as a gun pointed to the head. Innovation in conservation science, including cutting-edge genetic techniques aimed at saving species on the brink of extinction, is welcome and should be encouraged. But innovation is no substitute for regulation, any more than a laboratory or zoo is a substitute for the places where animals naturally live. Endangered species face a barrage of threats from human activities. We owe them a place to call home. Lisa H. Sideris is a Public Voices fellow of The OpEd Project and the University of California. Santa Barbara, where she is professor and vice-chair of the Environmental Studies Program. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Scientists issue dire warning after dramatic behavioral shift in northern owls — here's why this change is so troubling
A recent discovery has experts sounding the alarm: Northern saw-whet owls are turning up far from their usual homes. These changes could have lasting effects on communities that rely on healthy environments for farming, recreation, and everyday well-being. The northern saw-whet owl, one of North America's smallest birds of prey, is migrating much farther than experts once believed. A report from Coastal Review shared insights from field biologist Noah Price, whose work confirms that these palm-sized owls are traveling hundreds of miles across the continent, often at night. Thanks to decades of bird banding and tools like isotope analysis, researchers with Project Owlnet have discovered that these owls are navigating far-flung forests and mountain corridors. This shift in migration patterns suggests not only that they rely on a wider range of habitats than once believed but also that they face more risks along the way. When wildlife starts turning up in unfamiliar places, it usually means their usual homes are no longer meeting their needs. For northern saw-whets, that might mean trouble finding food, staying cool, or nesting safely in forests increasingly altered by development and rising temperatures. As Coastal Review noted, more dominant species like the barred owl have already displaced native birds like the northern spotted owl in the Pacific Northwest. If saw-whets move into new areas, they could unintentionally put pressure on other vulnerable species. Owls help control rodent populations, making life easier for farmers, gardeners, and homeowners. When owl numbers dip or move away, communities may see more pests and less balance in local ecosystems. For rural families and agricultural workers, those shifts can hit close to home. Changes in animal behavior also impact food security, economic stability, and public health. Do you think your city has good air quality? Definitely Somewhat Depends on the time of year Not at all Click your choice to see results and speak your mind. Fortunately, researchers are working hard to understand and respond to these changes. Conservation groups involved in Project Owlnet are tracking owl movements through banding, recorded calls, and biological sampling to gather essential data. You don't have to be a scientist to pitch in. Letting native plants grow, reducing chemical use, and leaving older trees standing can make your yard a more welcoming place for birds. Communities are already seeing results. In Los Angeles, residents replaced thirsty lawns with native flowers to support birds and pollinators. In Texas, people have rewilded their front yards, giving native species a place to rest and thrive. Across the country, bee-friendly gardens are also helping pollinators bounce back, restoring balance in backyards and public parks alike. These small actions can make a big difference. Creating bird-friendly habitats helps keep our ecosystems and communities healthier, more resilient, and better prepared for the changes ahead. Join our free newsletter for good news and useful tips, and don't miss this cool list of easy ways to help yourself while helping the planet.
