In the case of poachers you are certainly right. (I would put Cyril's killers in the same category as the poachers even if they found a loophole that allowed them to get away with it.)
The local guides actually broke the law. They hunted the lion on land where there was no quota for lions that year. Apparently this is common practice in that country. If a lion is taken on land without a quota, everyone just pretends it was taken on different land where there was a quota. It didn't work this time because the tracking collar allowed authorities to determine where the animal was killed, and the public outcry forced them to examine that data.
The American hunter was not a party to any wrongdoing. He trusted his guides to take him on a legal hunt and was furious when he realized that the hunt may not have been legal.
I'm not sure what to make of the local guides. If a law is not enforced and everyone commonly violates it, is it really poaching? Probably the best thing to do is take a closer look at the law regarding quotas. If it should be enforced, then start enforcing it. If the law just simply isn't working as written, then modify it so that it does work.
According to the radio report, Namibia has been able to increase its black rhino population by 30% through this approach.
The scimitar-horned oryx nearly went extinct until it was rescued by people who wanted to hunt it on private Texas ranches. Then the species flourished.
Then one of those nutty anti-hunting groups convinced Obama to outlaw hunting it in America. To his credit Obama realized his mistake and reversed the ban, but the damage was already done. Now the animal is nearly extinct again, and all because of nutty anti-hunting zealots.