The Pros And Cons Of Trophy Hunting As A Conservation Tool

ENGL 101 Introduction to Expository Writing

Beneficial aspects of trophy hunting

Trophy hunting refers to the shooting practice by hunters to kill big animal such as lions, bears, elephant, pumas, rhinos by paying money and using license given by the government. The whole practice is for only pleasure purpose. In this case, the trophy is the dead animal that is shot by the hunter. However, it may be the skin, head, horn or other portion of the body. In many countries in the world, the practice of trophy hunting is used as a process of wildlife conservation. However, when this practice is used in an improper way, it become a serious threat to the wild animals specially who are endangered in nature. Trophy hunting has become a fruitful conservation tool for various endangered species in those countries who are using this method in a scientific and controlled manner. However, in some countries like Kenya, trophy hunting is totally banned in order to protect the wildlife endangered species.  The fund generated from trophy hunting practice can be used in conservation of wildlife animals WWF (2016). So it can be said that, although it is not a good practice, it should not be an abolished totally in order to improve the conservation processes in different cases. In this essay, the beneficial aspects of the trophy hunting is discussed.

The issue of trophy hunting is very much controversial as it is hampering the conservation of the endangered and also it is associated with the ethical practices. However countries like South Africa, Canada, Mexico, New Zealand, Australia and some countries of Africa (almost half of the total countries in Africa) still believe that, trophy hunting is a helpful practice in order to conserve the species. Moreover, the practice of trophy hunting is legal and there are various social stigma that trophy hunting is illegal, photographic tourism is an alternative way of trophy hunting.  According to a report of IUCN (2016), trophy hunting practice has become very successful in South Africa. From the report it is seen that, the number of White Rhinos has increased to 18400 from 1800 in the time period of 1895- 2015 and after introducing the trophy hunting program in 1968 there is a stiff rise in the numbers of White Rhinos in South Africa. In case of black rhinos the number has increased to 3500 in Namibia and South Africa. In these countries, the trophy hunting helps to conserve 90% of African rhinos by 2015. Whereas only 0.34% of white rhinos and 0.05% of black rhinos were killed by the trophy hunting. From limited spot hunting of rhinos in Africa, the private land lords had built their own herd of white rhinos (approx. 6140 white rhinos and 630 black rhinos) on their private lands.  A rhino reserve of South Africa is had managed to increase the number of white rhinos up to 195 in their reserve along with other endangered species. Surprisingly this self-financed organization revealed that since last eight years, the key sources of their income was the trophy hunting (almost 63%). Whereas, only 18% of total fund was generated from tourism and between this time periods only 7 rhinos were killed. This reserve organization had used all of the earnings from trophy hunting in the conservation and protection of rhinos. The ban on import of lion trophy to US had impacted negatively on the income with dropped order of hunting (IUCN (2016). According to Hurley et al. (2015) the number of bighorn sheep in North America was almost 1800 in 1950 and after using the funds generated from the trophy hunting had helped to enhance the number (almost 80,000).  In US and Canada, the auctions of Bighorn sheep had generated almost $350,000 per year and from that amount 70% was used to help the conservation process of bighorn sheep. In Zimbabwe, the Save Valley Conservancy (SVC) has owned 344,000 ha land to conserve wildlife species and they had almost 117 black rhinos, 43 white rhinos, 280 lions and 1500 African elephants. From their largest property named Sango Ranch, almost US$ 600,000 was generated per year from trophy hunting. Another, conservation agency named Bubye Valley Conservancy (BVC) earned almost US$ 1380,605 from trophy hunting in 2015. In a recent study in Namibia showed that, if trophy hunting was banned in Namibia, maximum number of conservation programs would be stopped due to lack of funds as a huge amount of revenue was generated from trophy hunting. Along with this, wild life populations and local benefits would be also be lowered due to lack of money (Naidoo et al., 2016). It was noted that, the half of the generated revenue was used to protect and manage wild life. In Pakistan, the number of Afghan Urial and Suleiman Markhor had decreased very much due to uncontrolled hunting in 1980. After allowing limited trophy hunting of Urial and Markhor, the illegal hunting was decreased by many fold. From 1986 to 2012 the limited hunting of these two species had generated almost US$ 486,400 for the provincial government and along with the local communities also gained huge amount of funding for continuation of the Torghar Conservation Project.  Due to this, limited trophy hunting policy, the Markhor and Urial population had increased and the estimated Markhor population was almost 3500 in 2012 (Mallon, 2013). The improvement of the Markhor population had removed the species from IUCN red list and it was no longer considered as a threatened species (Michel & Rosen Michel, 2015). Whereas in Tajikistan the number of Markhor had become very less in mid -90s (almost 350 in numbers). The price of trophy hunt in Tajikistan was about US$ 100,000 per Markhor. The revenue generated from this hunting, four conservation programs were operated to recover the Markhor population and from the revenue salaries had been given to the local people who were employed as the guard. From a survey it was seen that the number of Markhor had increased to 1300 in Tajikistan (Alidodov et al., 2014). Not only that, the revenues generated from the trophy hunting, also helped to conserve other threatened species. In Tajikistan, higher densities of snow leopard had been recorded in a Markhor conservancy region (Rosen, 2014). According to Mbaiwa (2018), the banning of safari hunting in 2014, had negative impact on the tourism of Botswana and along with this the economic condition of the local residents was declined due to the ban of hunting. In the Mabage village, the income from tourism had declined to P500, 000 from P3.5 million. Fund generated from the safari hunting in Northern Botswana was used to run several conservation projects and due to the ban, various projects were stopped. In addition, the number of poaching incidents had increased in Northern Botswana after the ban of hunting and the number of incidents became 323 in 2014 and that was higher than that of the incidents reported in 2012 ( 309 cases in 2012). The ban on hunting had also ceased the revenue from the hunting and almost $20 million fund was generated annually in Northern Botswana. Among the collected fund , almost $6 million was given to the National parks and Department of Wildlife in Northern Botswana. Along with this, the conflict between the wild animals and human being had also enhanced and the dealing of such consequences had greatly hampered. Moreover, hunting ban had reduced the annual income of the government and the social adherence of the communities to the conservation had also lowered as there income had been reduced due to hunting ban. The number of wild animals in Kenya had decreased severely after posing ban on hunting and the number had reached to half of the before (Mbaiwa, 2018). In South Africa, most of the hunted animal (almost 96%) in 2012 were listed as a less vulnerable species and they are also very common. In 2012 total amount of revenue generated were US$68 million and almost 41% was generated from the hunting of Big Five. The countries of Southern Africa and Tanzania had the maximum number of big five trophies (2009-2013) (Cloete, Van der Merwe & Saayman, 2015). However, maximum number of revenue generated from the hunting of ‘Big Five’ that is lion, elephant ,leopard , black and white rhino which are very valuable in nature (Di Minin et al., 2013).

However, there are a few negative impact of trophy hunting on the conservation of wild life animals. Generally, the aged animal were shot in trophy hunting and the restriction had been posed on hunting younger animals. However, this regulation are not implemented properly. Along with this, the practice of canned hunting is not healthy for the conservation of the animals. In South Africa 80% of total trophy hunting was canned hunting in between 2009-13. In Tanzania, the revenue generated from the trophy hunting in 2008, 22% had used for conservation and remaining portion had gone to the private sector (Di Minin, Leader-Williams & Bradshaw, 2016).

From the above discussion it is quite clear that trophy hunting is a very much controversial practice. Around the world, mostly this practice had helped the conservation process of the wild animals. In most of the countries, this process has proved to be fruitful and numbers of the wild animals has also increased. So, it can be concluded that, although it is a matter of great controversy, it should not be banned completely, rather it should be continued with required interventions in the process.

References

Cloete, P. C., Van der Merwe, P., & Saayman, M. (2015). Game ranch profitability in South Africa (pp. 50-87). ABSA.

Di Minin, E., Fraser, I., Slotow, R., & MacMillan, D. C. (2013). Understanding heterogeneous preference of tourists for big game species: implications for conservation and management. Animal Conservation, 16(3), 249-258.

Di Minin, E., Leader-Williams, N., & Bradshaw, C. J. (2016). Banning trophy hunting will exacerbate biodiversity loss. Trends in Ecology & Evolution, 31(2), 99-102.

Hurley, K., Brewer, C., & Thornton, G. N. (2015). The role of hunters in conservation, restoration, and management of North American wild sheep. International Journal of Environmental Studies, 72(5), 784-796.

IUCN (2016). [online] D2ouvy59p0dg6k.cloudfront.net. Available at: https://d2ouvy59p0dg6k.cloudfront.net/downloads/iucn_informingdecisionsontrophyhuntingv1_1.pdf [Accessed 13 Nov. 2018].

List, R. Support the IUCN Red List. Retrieved from: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Stefan_Michel4/publication/280561504_Michel_S_and_Rosen_Michel_T_2015_Capra_falconeri_In_IUCN_Red_List_of_Threatened_Species_httpwwwiucnredlistorgdetailsfull37870/links/55b9b81d08ae9289a0900ce6/Michel-S-and-Rosen-Michel-T-2015-Capra-falconeri-In-IUCN-Red-List-of-Threatened-Species-http-wwwiucnredlistorg-details-full-3787-0.pdf.

Mallon, D. (2013). Trophy hunting of CITES-listed species in Central Asia. TRAFFIC report for the CITES Secretariat.

Mbaiwa, J. E. (2018). Effects of the safari hunting tourism ban on rural livelihoods and wildlife conservation in Northern Botswana. South African Geographical Journal, 100(1), 41-61.

Michel, S. & Rosen Michel, T. 2015. Capra falconeri. The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species 2015: Retrieved from: https://dx.doi.org/10.2305/IUCN.UK.2015.

Naidoo, R., Weaver, L. C., Diggle, R. W., Matongo, G., Stuart?Hill, G., & Thouless, C. (2016). Complementary benefits of tourism and hunting to communal conservancies in Namibia. Conservation Biology, 30(3), 628-638.

Rosen, T. 2014. Tajikistan Brings Endangered Wild Goat From the Edge of Extinction to the Peak of Hope. National Geographic Voices: Cat Watch June 11, 2014. https://voices.nationalgeographic. com/2014/06/11/tajikistan-brings-endangered-wild-goat-from-the-edge-of-extinction-to-the-peakof-hope/

WWF (2016). [online] D2ouvy59p0dg6k.cloudfront.net. Available at: https://d2ouvy59p0dg6k.cloudfront.net/downloads/wwf_policy_and_considerations_re_trophy_hunting__july_2016_.pdf [Accessed 13 Nov. 2018].

Alidodov, M., Amirov, Z., Oshurmamadov, N., Saidov, K., Bahriev, J. and Kholmatov, I. 2014. Survey of markhor at the Hazratishoh and Darvaz Ranges, Tajikistan. State Forestry Agency under the Government of the Republic of Tajikistan, Dushanbe.