The poachers, from an overlook, do so for terrorist organisations out of either fear for their lives or for a source of income. From a consequentialist standpoint, whereby the consequence of either staying alive or having a source of income, the consequences of poaching are more favourable than unfavourable.
But from a utilitarian standpoint, the act of killing these elephants is not more favourable to society as a whole. Due in part to the consequences of loss of park rangers, and if, holding the environmental standpoint of nature as an equal to society, this opposes the stance that no one is more than one. So these poachers do NOT follow utilitarian logistics.
An ethical relativist of what is right for one society may not be right for another, may apply to the poachers. For the Al Shabaab militants who “grew up surrounded by conflict” and are “products of a failed society” may view the government and terrorist organisations in the reverse as other countries (Yahya, 2017). As the government is “not a positive force in their lives” the organisations they poach for, providing income and a form of ruling, stand in lieu of the government (Yahya, 2017).