{"id":768,"date":"2020-12-30T20:13:34","date_gmt":"2020-12-30T20:13:34","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/?p=768"},"modified":"2021-01-07T12:09:23","modified_gmt":"2021-01-07T12:09:23","slug":"killing-in-the-name-of-greater-good-the-complexities-of-trophy-hunting","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/index.php\/2020\/12\/30\/killing-in-the-name-of-greater-good-the-complexities-of-trophy-hunting\/","title":{"rendered":"Killing in the name of greater good? The complexities of trophy hunting"},"content":{"rendered":"\n
\"\"<\/figure>\n\n\n\n

Trophy hunting is a topic that sparks discussion, often debated in the comment section of a trophy picture shared on one of many social media platforms. A middle-aged man with a wide grin on his face, posing proudly with the corpse of a dead animal. Many find such images disturbing. I mean, who wouldn\u2019t, right? What\u2019s even worse, conservation scientists claim that trophy hunting can serve conservation purposes. What? Killing animals to protect animals? That sounds like nonsense. Well, it turns out that it\u2019s not as simple as that. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

While trophy\nhunting is often associated with African wildlife, it occurs in many other countries.\nFor example, polar bears Ursus maritimus<\/em> are hunted in Canada, argali\nsheep Ovis ammon<\/em> in Central Asia and Roe deer Capreolus capreolus <\/em>in\nEurope. Contrary to subsistence hunting, where wild animals are hunted for\ntheir meat, trophy hunting is recreational and often targets animals with a\ndesired characteristic such as large antlers, tusks, horns or teeth. Trophy\nhunting is often conflated by the media with \u201ccanned hunting\u201d, where animals\nare kept in small enclosures, and poaching, which is illegal killing of\nwildlife. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Trophy\nhunting as a tool for conservation<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

So how can trophy\nhunting be conservation? It all boils down to the somewhat cynical saying \u201cif\nit pays, it stays\u201d. The basic gist is that trophy hunting creates an incentive\nto protect a species or habitat by making it an economically more viable option\nthan other alternatives. For example, farmers rely on a good harvest of crops\nto sustain themselves and their families. A good harvest is conditional on an adequate\namount of rain, sunshine, soil nutrition and the fact that the crops haven\u2019t\nbeen eaten prior to the actual harvest. Instances were crops have been raided\nby wildlife can lead to human-wildlife conflicts. Now, if the farmer relies on\nthe crop to feed the family, the obvious choice would be to get rid of the\nwildlife raiding the crops. However, if someone is willing to pay more for the wildlife\nthan the value of the crops, then keeping the wildlife alive is the better\noption. Putting a monetary value on wildlife can make the financial incentive of\ntrophy hunting better than other land-use alternatives, such as agriculture or housing\ndevelopment, thereby protecting not only the trophy species but also the other\nspecies within the habitat. Similarly, the revenue from hunting fees can then\nbe redirected into measures such as anti-poaching efforts or development in local\ncommunities. But is it right to sell the lives of animals as if it was nothing\nelse than a pair of trousers? It depends on the ethical standpoint. Acceptance of\ntrophy hunting largely relies on a utilitarian rationale, where the sacrifice\nof a few individual animals benefits the remaining wildlife and communities,\nleading to a net utility benefit relative to other land-use options. Therefore,\ntrophy hunting is the better option if the marginal benefit exceeds that of alternative\nland-use types. For example, if trophy hunting secures a higher abundance of\nwildlife and benefits local communities more than alternative options such as\nfarming, then trophy hunting is the better option. It should be noted that the\ntopic can be discussed in the light of other ethical theories, but we won\u2019t\ndive into that in this post (see Ghasemi 2020 instead)<\/p>\n\n\n\n

The theory\nexplains how trophy hunting can serve as a conservation tool, but what about in\npractice? Again, it depends on how the specific trophy hunting programme is\nmanaged and the settings it operates within. Evidence suggests that when\nproperly managed, trophy hunting delivers conservation benefits. For example,\nrhino hunting programmes in South Africa and Namibia are good examples of such.\nSince 1968, the number of white rhinos has increased from around 1800\nindividuals to more than 18400 in 2017 (Emslie et al 2016; Cooney et al 2017). Evidence\nalso supports the contrary, with poorly managed hunting quotas leading to lion\nand leopard declines in Tanzania (Packer et al 2011).<\/p>\n\n\n\n

What\nabout alternatives?<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Photo-tourism\nis often promoted as a substitute by opponents of trophy hunting. The revenue\ngenerated from photo tourism easily exceeds that of trophy hunting. However, photo-tourism\ndepends on factors such as diverse and high wildlife densities and developed\ninfrastructure which makes it an unviable option for some areas. <\/p>\n\n\n\n

Trophy\nhunting does not only divide the public opinion, it also divides the scientific\ncommunity. In 2019, a group of scientists published the short letter \u201ctrophy\nhunting bans imperil biodiversity\u201d in the scientific journal Science (Dickman\net al 2019). This letter was signed by 128 conservationists and warned governments\nabout legislating against the import of trophies. The authors argued that such\nbans could lead to land conversion (e.g from biodiverse habitats to farmland)\nand thus wildlife declines (by affecting the demand for African trophies and\nthus the incentive to protect wildlife for those involved). Albeit the authors found\nthe act of trophy hunting repugnant and recognized that poorly managed programmes\ncan cause local population declines, in the absence of effective alternative\nmeasures banning well-managed trophy hunting could have unintended negative\nconsequences. The letter emphasized the importance of relying on science when\nmaking difficult policy decisions such as trophy hunting bans but also the\ncomplexity of the topic. Other scientists argue that a trophy ban could be an\nopportunity to rethink how we protect wildlife in non-exhaustive ways using new\nsolutions such as conservation-compatible-agriculture and by reforming tourism beyond\nphotography (Nowak et al 2019).  <\/p>\n\n\n\n

There is no\ndefinitive or right answer in the trophy hunting debate. If operated properly,\ntrophy hunting can be beneficial to wildlife and surrounding communities and if\nmismanaged the contrary is true. The complexity at which conservation operates\nin makes it impossible to select a widely applicable \u201cone option suits all\u201d\nsolution. Furthermore, the topic of trophy hunting extends beyond choosing the \u201coptimal\u201d\nsolution regarding wildlife alone. The perceived problems with trophy hunting\nare not necessarily the same across continents. For example, ethical\nconsiderations related to killing wildlife for recreational purposes is often\nat the heart of westerners opposing trophy hunting whereas Africans oppose\ntrophy hunting because it is perceived as being a neo-colonial privilege for\nthe western elite. An African study using data from three primarily African\nsocial media platforms found that Africans perceived westerner\u2019s criticism of animal\nviolence as overblown and illustrated how westerners held wildlife in higher\nregard than the African people (Mkono 2019). This sparks the question of\nwhether western interference with African Wildlife can be justified, both in\nrelation to supporting trophy hunt but also opposing it, as it is the African\npeople that must live with the immediate consequences. The topic is complex and\ndeserves to be discussed on a case by case basis, accounting for both wildlife\nand people while also considering the ethical consequences of different choices.\nHopefully, the increased attention and discussion surrounding trophy hunting will\nresult in new and innovative ways of protecting local biodiversity.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

References<\/strong><\/p>\n\n\n\n

Cooney R et al. 2017. The\nbaby and the bathwater: Trophy hunting, conservation and rural livelihoods.\nUnasylva 68<\/strong>:3\u201316.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Dickman A, Johnson PJ, Louis\nMP, Roe D, Al E. 2019. Trophy hunting bans imperil biodiversity. Science 365<\/strong>:873\u2013875.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Emslie, R.E., Milliken, T.,\nTalukdar, B., Ellis, S., Adcock, K. & Knight, M.H., compilers. 2016.\nAfrican and Asian rhinoceroses: status, conservation and trade. A report from\nthe IUCN Species Survival Commission (IUCN SSC) African and Asian Rhino\nspecialist groups and TRAFFIC to the CITES Secretariat pursu- ant to Resolution\nConf. 9.14 (Rev. CoP15). CITES<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Ghasemi B. 2020. Trophy\nhunting and conservation: Do the major ethical theories converge in opposition\nto trophy hunting? People and Nature:1\u201311.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Mkono M. 2019. Neo-colonialism\nand greed: Africans\u2019 views on trophy hunting in social media. Journal of\nSustainable Tourism 27<\/strong>:689\u2013704. Routledge. Available from\nhttps:\/\/doi.org\/10.1080\/09669582.2019.1604719.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Nowak K, Lee PC, Marino J,\nMkono M, Mumby H, Dobson A, Harvey R, Lindsay K, Lusseau D, Sillero-Zubiri C.\n2019. Trophy hunting: Bans create opening for change. Science 366<\/strong>:434\u2013435.<\/p>\n\n\n\n

Packer C, Brink H, Kissui BM,\nMaliti H, Kushnir H, Caro T. 2011. Effects of Trophy Hunting on Lion and\nLeopard Populations in Tanzania. Conservation Biology 25<\/strong>:142\u2013153.\nAvailable from http:\/\/doi.wiley.com\/10.1111\/j.1523-1739.2010.01576.x.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Trophy hunting is a topic that sparks discussion, often debated in the comment section of a trophy picture shared on one of many social media platforms. A middle-aged man with a wide grin on his face, posing proudly with the corpse of a dead animal. Many find such images disturbing. I mean, who wouldn\u2019t, right? […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":4,"featured_media":771,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"_monsterinsights_skip_tracking":false,"footnotes":""},"categories":[6],"tags":[],"class_list":["post-768","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-blog"],"rttpg_featured_image_url":{"full":["https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/buffalo.jpg",1944,1296,false],"landscape":["https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/buffalo.jpg",1944,1296,false],"portraits":["https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/buffalo.jpg",1944,1296,false],"thumbnail":["https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/buffalo-150x150.jpg",150,150,true],"medium":["https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/buffalo-300x200.jpg",300,200,true],"large":["https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/buffalo-1024x683.jpg",610,407,true],"1536x1536":["https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/buffalo-1536x1024.jpg",1536,1024,true],"2048x2048":["https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/buffalo.jpg",1944,1296,false],"post-thumbnail":["https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/buffalo-680x330.jpg",680,330,true],"evolve-post-thumbnail":["https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/buffalo-680x330.jpg",680,330,true],"evolve-slider-thumbnail":["https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/buffalo-400x300.jpg",400,300,true],"evolve-tabs-img":["https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/buffalo-50x50.jpg",50,50,true],"evolve-testimonial-avatar":["https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/12\/buffalo-80x80.jpg",80,80,true]},"rttpg_author":{"display_name":"Sean Jellesmark","author_link":"https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/index.php\/author\/sean\/"},"rttpg_comment":0,"rttpg_category":"Blog<\/a>","rttpg_excerpt":"Trophy hunting is a topic that sparks discussion, often debated in the comment section of a trophy picture shared on one of many social media platforms. A middle-aged man with a wide grin on his face, posing proudly with the corpse of a dead animal. Many find such images disturbing. I mean, who wouldn\u2019t, right?…","_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/768","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/4"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=768"}],"version-history":[{"count":3,"href":"https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/768\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":782,"href":"https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/768\/revisions\/782"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/771"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=768"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=768"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.science4wildlife.com\/index.php\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=768"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}