Is Trophy Hunting an Effective Tool for Conservation in Southern and Eastern Africa?
Introduction
Africa as a continent has been going through a period of rapid change and growth in recent decades, putting much of the natural habitats and biodiversity under great threat, from human activities such as deforestation, resource extraction, as well as the illegal trade in wildlife and poaching. 90% of the population in Africa rely on wood as a primary fuel for heating and cooking and combined with the clearing of bush land for agriculture and heavy livestock grazing has resulted in mass deforestation and land degradation of many natural landscapes. There are many attempts and initiatives in place to try and conserve these natural habitats, such as the creation of national parks, protecting them from deforestation and resource extraction, along with the employment of rangers and guards to protect the wild life. However, a more controversial method of conservation has been proposed. This is the activity of trophy hunting, the killing of wild animals, such as elephants and lions for sport. However much of the general public feel that this claim of trophy hunting being an effective tool for conservation is simply the hunting industries justification of killing for sport, rather than being actual fact. In this report I will discuss the ways in which trophy hunting can be used as a tool for the conservation of natural habitats and wildlife, as well as looking into factors that limit trophy hunting as a conservation tool. I will also look into the ethics of trophy hunting and evaluate how these affect it as a tool for conservation. Finally, I will cast my opinion to whether or not I believe that trophy hunting is as effective tool for conservation.
Sustainable Trophy Hunting
Trophy hunting is the hunting and killing of wild game animals for human recreation. The trophy is the animal, or the part of the animal that is kept and displayed, often the head,
skin, antlers or horns of the animal. The rest of the animal is either used for food or donated to local communities to use. The most popular species to hunt in Southern and East Africa
are Elephants, Buffalo and Lions. Sustainable hunting only allows for the hunting of male animals, which are beyond a breeding age, as to not effect overall species numbers, as it is the females and young which are required to continue the growth of a species. Despite many of these species to be considered to be threatened or endangered, trophy hunting is often considered to be sustainable. It is self-regulating as low-off takes (off-takes = number of animals hunted) are required for good quality trophy animals to survive. If they are over hunted, the quality of trophies decreases, meaning people are not interested in hunting them.
Trophy Hunting as a Tool for Conservation
The main argument for trophy hunting being an effective tool for conservation is the revenue produced by the auctioning of hunts to sport hunters, with the income from this being invested back into the conservation of the parks, ranches and natural habitats used. It has been estimated that trophy hunting across Africa brings in $200 million annually. Statistics show that trophy hunting has created financial incentives for the development and protection of wildlife as a land use across an area of 1.4 million square kilometres. In South Africa specifically, there has been a shift from livestock ranches to game ranches on private land, resulting in there being 5000 game ranches and 4000 mixed livestock and game ranches, creating a protected environment for over 1.7 million animals. By creating financial incentives for land owners and communities, trophy hunting promotes the protection of land, over using it for agriculture and resource extraction, therefore conserving the natural habitats and wildlife.
Another land use that creates large amounts of revenue in these areas is eco-tourism, safaris and photographic trips. However, trophy hunting is able to utilise areas and generate revenue in areas of land where eco-tourism is not a valid land use. For example, trophy hunting is a viable land use in Ethiopia, which has 32 403 km squared of state owned land, reserved and protected for the use of sport hunters. Trophy hunting is often a viable land use when eco-tourism is not, because it can be carried out in remote areas lacking infrastructure, which are not practical for conventional tourists as the clientele tend to be accommodating to camping and living off bare minimums as it is considered to be part of the hunting experience. It is also a viable land use in area with unattractive scenery or with low densities of viewable wildlife. Finally, trophy hunting is also a viable land use in area going through political unrest, for example, during Zimbabwe’s uprising, eco-tourism almost stopped as an industry, however it was found that there was very little change in the number of trophy hunters visiting the area. The fact that trophy hunting can be carried out in areas where other land uses are not an option makes it an effective tool for conservation as it means this land is not left to be used as grazing land or for agriculture, protecting the natural habitats and the wildlife that reside there.
As well as being reserved to fairly specific area, eco-tourism also has quite a detrimental effect on the environment. For there to be high revenue to be created from eco-tourism, there has to be a high footfall of tourists. This has a detrimental effect on the land as it requires large amounts of environmental conversion for infrastructure development, such as hotels, roads and other facilities, as well as large amounts of waste being produced. Eco-tourism also has a very high fossil fuel usage due to the usage of vehicles and electricity consumption. However, the revenue generated from trophy hunting is considerably higher per client than eco-tourism. In Zimbabwe and Tanzania, revenues from trophy hunting are 30 and 14 times higher per client than eco-tourism respectively. This means that potentially the same revenues can be created by trophy hunting as eco-tourism, with a considerably lower environmental impact, making it an effective tool for conservation.
Poaching and the illegal trade of wildlife is another major threat to the wildlife that live in East and Southern Africa, such as the ivory trade and the sale of rhino horn. This is such a threat to wildlife, such as elephants and rhinos, as poachers persecute these animals heavily, to the point that some species have reached extinction, such as the northern white rhino. Trophy hunting an actually protect these animals from illegal hunting and poaching in many ways. Firstly, lease agreements for the land used in many countries, such as South Africa, Botswana and Namibia, demand assistance in anti-poaching and the training of rangers from hunting operators in hunting concessions. This means that the animals in the concessions are protected from poaching, allowing government forces to focus on other areas which are also affected by poaching. Even in countries where there is not a legal pre-requisite, operators tend to conduct anti-poaching activities, as they still need to protect the wildlife on which their livelihood depends. By protecting the concessions from poaching, allowing government resources to be used in other areas, saving resources is another way in which trophy hunting can be used as a conservation tool.
The final argument for trophy hunting as tool for conservation is the low leakage of revenues produced. Eco-tourism packages are often booked through overseas agents, resulting in a significant proportion of revenues being lost from the host countries, resulting in less investment being available for conservation. However, most hunting operators working in Africa are based in Africa, 92.6% to be exact, with 88% of operators being based in the countries where most hunting is conducted. For example, in Botswana, 75% of trophy hunting remains within country compared to 27% of eco-tourism revenue. This results in a far more direct source of income for communities and governments, resulting in far more investment opportunities for conservation.
Problems of the Trophy Hunting Industry Which Limits its Conservation Role
Despite all of the ways that Trophy hunting can be used as a tool for conservation mentioned above, many of these benefits are poorly utilised or face issues making them great in theory but poor in practice. Issues surrounding trophy hunting are faced of both private land and on government owned concessions.
In many countries on Southern Africa, such as Botswana, Namibia and South Africa, fences surrounding the hunting concessions are required by law. These fences limit conservation as they stop the free movement of animals, as neighbouring concessions do not want to lose trophies to competing businesses. Fencing also often results in the overstocking of wildlife. As the animals are unable to leave the concessions, the population can become too high for the area. This results in environmental degradation through overgrazing and erosion from the animals walking over the land. This reduces the conservational power of trophy hunting as the natural landscape is degraded much the same as it would be if the land use was agriculture.
On private land, ‘non-huntable’ species are often persecuted to protect the trophy species. This results in the killing of species such as wild dogs, leopards and other predatory species for the protection of the hunatble game. This also would be carried out if the land was used for cattle ranching, reducing the trophy hunting industries claims to be a tool for conservation.
Exotic species are often introduced to increase the diversity of trophy species, such as the fallow deer. This introduction of new species increases the competition for resources with the native species, putting more pressure on them. Closely related species are also often hybridised to create new trophy species. Species like the blue and black wildebeest do not occur naturally. This introduction of exotic species and hybridised species puts extra pressure on native species as well as diluting the gene pool as the interbreed, meaning that native species are not being conserved.
Many problems are also present on communally and state-owned land. Despite the high revenues produced from trophy hunting, rural communities living on or near concessions rarely benefit equally from the trophy hunting activities. This is due to weak legislation enforcing community involvement and the failure of national governments to spread wildlife ownership to local communities, resulting in a lack of skills amongst communities to run hunting operations or negotiate improved terms with existing operators. This inequality means that local people do not see a value in the wildlife, meaning they have no incentive to conserve or protect the environment, meaning that animals are still hunted for food or killed for trampling crops. Trophy hunting rarely resolves wildlife – human conflicts which is one of the biggest threats to wildlife.
The allocation of hunting area also limits trophy hunting’s ability to conserve. In Tanzania, the allocation of concessions is controlled by several individuals, resulting in reduced income, to be used for conservation, through the abuse of authority and corruption. In addition to this the enforcement of lease holder to provide anti-poaching and community development is often vague and poor, resulting in poaching to continue and communities not benefiting from trophy hunting, making trophy hunting a fairly weak tool for conservation.
The anti-poaching contributions are not the only aspect of hunting that are poorly enforced. Most state departments lack the resources to effectively measure and monitor the wildlife populations, resulting in hunting quotas often being based on guesswork. This means that despite hunting quotas being set, they are difficult to enforce, resulting in the overshooting of species, such as lions. This over shooting is also enabled by the corruption of government scouts.
The final major problem that limits trophy hunting as a conservation tool is the competition with citizen hunting. Local people are provided with large and poorly supervised quotas to hunt the wildlife. Many of these quotas are set at heavily subsidised prices, which results in the in the reduction of high value trophies which can be sold to foreign hunters for a much higher price. This therefore results in reduced oncome for conservation and reduced incentives for local communities to protect wildlife.
Ethical Issues Surrounding Trophy Hunting
Trophy hunting has received an awful lot of bad press in news and media in recent years. This is due to some very unethical practices being carried out. Reports of shooing animals from vehicles, shooting females and young, as well as luring animals from national parks and protected areas to be hunted have all been issued. This viewed as very unethical as there is no conservational aspect to this, as killing young and female animals harms population number greatly and taking animals from protected sites is effectively the same as poaching. In South Africa especially many very unethical approaches to hunting have been reported. The practice of hunting with dogs, put-and-take hunting (the practice of releasing trophies into an area immediately prior to the hunt), and canned hunting (the shooting of animals in a small enclosure which they can’t escape – most commonly lions). These forms of hunting provide no conservation for the natural landscape and have no ‘sporting’ aspect to them. They are just seen as to satisfy the hunters blood lust and be cruel. In addition to this, operators are not obliged to belong to professional hunting associations or agree to their standards, making it very difficult to monitor operators activities and enforce ethical practices. Despite these practices having little relevance to conservation itself, they are enabled by the trophy hunting industry, and negatively impact the public perception on trophy hunting, reducing the revenue produced which can be invested back into conservation.
 
Conclusion
In conclusion, in theory responsible trophy hunting has the capacity to be a very effective tool for conservation. By generating large amounts of revenue, which can be invested back into the natural landscape and used to conserve the biodiversity and habitats. Through the conversion of livestock ranches to game reserves and the creation of new game reserves, trophy hunting can conserve the natural landscape from other land uses, such as agriculture, natural resource extraction and deforestation, which are the largest threats to the environment. Trophy hunting also has the potential to help combat the illegal trade of wildlife and poaching through the employment and training of anti-poaching scouts and by putting a value on the wildlife for locals, giving them an incentive to conserve them. However, at the moment, these tools for conservation seem to be mainly theoretical and fail in practice. This is due to problems caused by the fencing in of animals, a lack of control and monitoring over the number of animals hunted, and corruption of government officials which results in local communities not benefiting from the hunting industry. Despite all of the ethical issues faced and the bad press that trophy hunting has received, organisations such as WWF and the African Wildlife Foundation have stated that sustainable, responsible trophy hunting can be an effective tool for conservation. In my opinion I believe that trophy hunting has the potential to be an effective tool for conservation, however until the inequality of distribution of revenue is balanced out and stricter, more accurate monitoring and regulatory procedures are introduced, it will remain more of a theoretical tool for conservation, rather than a practical tool itself.