In November 2012, the president of Botswana, Lieutenant General Ian Khama, announced that the country would not issue any more hunting licenses for 2013, and by 1 January 2014 all hunting would be banned nationwide.⁽²⁾ The move comes amidst reports that the numbers of a multitude of species across the Okavango Delta have sharply declined since 1996.⁽³⁾ Botswana is not the first nation in Africa to ban trophy hunting for the purpose of animal conservation — Kenya banned all game hunting in 1977 — but it is the latest to do so in the constant struggle between ecological preservation and large hunting profits. Neighbouring Zambia followed Botswana’s lead shortly thereafter, by announcing in January 2013 that they were placing a ban on game hunting of endangered big cats, notably leopards and lions.⁽⁴⁾ Officials explained that the big cat population had dwindled to numbers much too low to sustain any hunting industry and that the profits from hunting big cats do not justify the continued depletion of these species.⁽⁵⁾ This movement toward limiting or ending game hunting may encourage other nations across the African continent to examine their stance on this issue in an attempt to protect their valuable species for visual and photographic tourism. However, these actions are not without their critics.

The ban on wildlife hunting remains controversial among many parties. It is not only hunters, who want the opportunity to hunt continent-wide, who have criticised bans on hunting, but also some other critics, such as adjacent states and ecological conservationists, that have expressed their dissatisfaction with such drastic actions. This CAI paper explores the history of game hunting in Africa, the economics of the sport and the reasons for the sudden shift in opinion in certain countries in the heart of the continent. It then examines two primary camps of critics, hunters and certain conservationists, to attempt to answer the question: is banning game hunting across Africa a positive move overall when considering all parties, in addition to the potential economic ramifications? African hunting has been a part of the culture, experience and survival on the continent since the beginning of man’s existence. With these alterations in conceptual innovations through government sponsored limitations or bans towards the industry as a whole, will these nations prove that sustainable economic advances are possible without sport hunting, or will the critics win out and see these bans fail?

A brief history of hunting in Africa

At the dawn of mankind in the Great Rift Valley in the heart of Africa, hunter-gatherer cultures arose through primitive tribes’ utilisation of rudimentary weapons to track and kill game for consumption. Since that time, the remnants of the hunter-gatherer remain, woven into the folds of culture in the form of stories, names and places that are connected with an extensive history of hunting, spread over millennia.⁽⁶⁾ However, the history of sport game hunting in Africa remains much shorter and more convoluted than simply providing people with sustenance and resources.

Big game hunting and sport hunting on the continent began primarily with the influx of Europeans that flooded the continent in the late 19th and early 20th centuries, as explorers, missionaries, soldiers and settlers flocked to the new and vastly unexplored landscape.⁽⁷⁾ These people often journeyed to Africa for promise of a new life on the Dark Continent, but most of them also indulged in the thrill and excitement of hunting the vast array of unique animals that populate the region.⁽⁸⁾ Then, the demand for ivory struck and the slaughtering of elephants on a massive scale became the preferred business of so-called ‘ivory harvesters’, who left a wake of elephant carcasses strewn across the plains in their pursuit of lining their pockets.⁽⁹⁾ Certain hunters, such as former United States (US) president Theodore “Teddy” Roosevelt, turned Africa into their personal game reserve, with President Roosevelt reportedly killing or trapping more than 11,000 animals during a safari in central Africa in 1909.⁽¹⁰⁾ The romanticism of the hunt spread among the elite in Europe and North America as the call to adventure summoned some of the richest of the time. This practice of big game sport hunting and ivory poaching of unequalled proportions was followed by one of the most prominent and destructive forces known to the indigenous animal population of Africa: the white settler.

White settlers may have been the single biggest reason for the rapid decline in animal populations at the turn of the 20th century.⁽¹¹⁾ These groups of people often stated the extermination of wildlife as an objective when settling in various areas around Africa, to clear land for their massive farms and grazing areas for domestic livestock.⁽¹²⁾ With the assistance of colonial game departments, wildlife was driven away or outright killed to remove threats to the livestock and prevent larger animals such as elephants and rhinos from trampling on valuable crops.⁽¹³⁾ Due to the longevity of these practices, settlers were the most catastrophic force to act on the African animal population.

Today the practice of game hunting has reverted back to the romanticism of elites, as the wealthy once again dominate the African hunting world.⁽¹⁴⁾ Due to exorbitant prices commanded for hunting licenses and the overall cost of funding big game hunts, only the extremely rich can afford the luxury of shooting big game in Africa, with many avid sportsman attempting to complete the ‘Big Five’ of hunting in Africa.⁽¹⁵⁾ In addition, poachers in search of ivory and rhinoceros horns have always been a problem, but today the practice is once again on the rise as the new consumer culture in parts of Asia has led to resurgence in the industry.⁽¹⁶⁾ Conservationists following the trail of ivory and rhino horns — the horns are used as a form of high-priced Eastern medicine — have pointed to the Chinese demand for ivory and the growing demand for rhino horn in Asia generally, as the primary reasons for the sharp increase in poaching.⁽¹⁷⁾

The history of hunting in Africa stretches back millennia, but the rampant destruction of certain animal species remains a reality still in its adolescence. The destruction of the animal population on the continent by game hunters, poachers and settlers over the last 150 years is the primary reason why many of the countries in the heart of Africa are following Kenya’s example by placing limitations on hunting, or banning the practice outright. However, for many nations, the presence of huge profits from wealthy hunters makes it difficult to push such legislation. The economic gains from hunting often remain too large to ignore.

The economics of the hunting industry

Trophy hunting is permitted in 23 Sub-Saharan African countries, with Botswana leaving the ranks next year.⁽¹⁸⁾ The industry generates approximately US$ 200 million per year based on available data, catering to 18,000 clients.⁽¹⁹⁾ South Africa has by far the largest trophy hunting industry, drawing in US$ 120 million per year in 2010, more than three times the earnings of the next biggest hunting industry in Africa.⁽²⁰⁾ However, in certain other countries such as Botswana, Tanzania and Namibia, hunting comprises 0.08% or more of the gross domestic product (GDP), which makes it a significant contributor to the national economy.⁽²¹⁾ In Botswana, elephants compose over half of the total animals hunted for sport.⁽²²⁾ Trophy licenses and fees can stretch upwards of US$ 70,000 for a bull elephant with over 100 pounds (45 kilograms) of tusks, or as high as US$ 350,000 for a black rhino in South Africa, one of only two countries that permits the hunting of this endangered species.⁽²³⁾

With such high prices for licenses and fees paid to the industry, the hunters clearly intend to spend money, which translates into state revenue. So why would a country such as Botswana outlaw a practice that generates consistent income? Well, while hunting can draw in certain amounts of money that contribute to the overall economy of the nation, the reality is that photographic tourism and safaris for the same species that are hunted, well outdistance any profits from hunting. In Tanzania, the revenue from just two of its wildlife parks, Serengeti and Ngorongoro, remains higher than the entire nationwide hunting industry generated in an average year. In Botswana, as of 2011, tourism contributed 11% to GDP and it has consistently seen growth rates of 14% or higher for the last eight years, making it the second largest and second most important industry in the country.⁽²⁴⁾ Being a landlocked country, the majority of tourism revenue is derived from safaris. With hunting revenue contributing only approximately 0.1% to GDP,⁽²⁵⁾ photographic safari tourism is by far the most important element economically. Nations such as Botswana and Zambia have decided that in order to retain the revenues derived from non-hunting safaris, hunting needs to be restricted or eliminated.

Conserving the fauna for tourists

When considering how integral tourism has become to Botswana’s economy, the choice to outlaw hunting nationwide seems essential to keeping the industry sustainable. Botswana is home to one third of the continent’s elephant population, approximately 130,000 animals within its borders.⁽²⁶⁾ While the elephant numbers remain stable, other species were found to be in rapid decline. In fact, 11 species of animals in Botswana have declined 61% since 1996, and several figures were much higher.⁽²⁷⁾ For example, the population of ostriches dropped 95%, wildebeests 90%, and nearly two thirds of the giraffe population have been decimated.⁽²⁸⁾ In Zambia, the ban on big cat game hunting came amid reports of less than 4,500 total lions in the country; the number of wild leopards is currently unknown.⁽²⁹⁾ With rising rates of poachers in these nations and declining numbers of animals which are vital to sustainable development in the tourism sector, the decision to outlaw all hunting, or limit the hunting of certain animals, seems a simple move for national officials. However, certain critics disagree.

Critics’ arguments

Critics of the new hunting laws trending in parts of Africa often point to the possibility that hunting licenses and regulated hunting actually aid in wildlife conservation. A 2007 study by Peter Lindsey, a conservation biologist at the University of Harare in Zimbabwe, found that hunting could contribute to sustaining or increasing animal populations.⁽³⁰⁾ Lindsey argues that allowing hunting provides a financial incentive to reintroduce to private land species that are nearing extinction. He points to the rejuvenation of both the white and black rhinoceros species as examples of how near-extinct animals can recover in this fashion.⁽³¹⁾ In addition, he states that providing tenure on multiple hunting seasons will allow private land owners to protect certain species listed as endangered and provide ample time and protection to increase numbers.⁽³²⁾ The success of such a plan is contingent on self-regulation within the trophy hunting industry itself, to ensure increased marketability of future species available for hunting permits. Lindsey believes that this long-term process will place the responsibility of conservation in the hands of private hunting industry groups, which will self-regulate reintroduction and protection to encourage increased marketability, and therefore profits.⁽³³⁾

In their critique of hunting bans, hunters also point to previous attempts on the continent to outlaw hunting. In the early 1970s both Kenya and Tanzania introduced controversial bans to increase specific class numbers. However, many hunting advocates claim that this process elicited the reverse effect. Figures from advocates show that 70% of all animals outside of national parks in Kenya have been poached since the ban.⁽³⁴⁾ And while Tanzania lifted their ban in 1978, Kenya never did.  The result they claim: Tanzania’s elephant population has been rejuvenated and Kenya’s continues to decline from poaching.⁽³⁵⁾ Hunters and hunting organisations also claim that hunting profits can be utilised to provide more revenue to anti-poaching initiatives.⁽³⁶⁾ The ideology of trophy hunting actually rejuvenating wildlife in Africa has become the rallying call for game hunters and hunting advocates across the globe.

Conclusion

Hunting in Africa possesses a long and chequered past. From the early great hunts of Ernest Hemingway and Teddy Roosevelt to the blatant destruction by settlers during the colonial period, animal species in Africa have suffered at the expense of expansion and sport. The government of Botswana decided to take a stand and conserve their majestic animals for photographic tourists. In support of their decision, they cite the alarmingly low numbers of certain species and the desire to maintain them for the most profitable form of tourism: photographic safaris.

While hunting advocates argue that hunting bans and restrictions only encourage poaching, they must examine the situation in South Africa. South Africa carries the most liberal hunting laws on the continent, even allowing the hunting of the endangered white and black rhinoceros.⁽³⁷⁾ However, it also maintains one of the highest levels of poaching on the continent, especially among certain species.⁽³⁸⁾ Also, with the case of Tanzania and Kenya — arguably the most prominent case of hunting bans and their effect on wildlife figures — recent incidents show that neither banning nor advocating hunting seems to affect poaching. On 8 January 2013, 11 elephants were found gunned down by poachers in the largest single elephant slaughter in 30 years.⁽³⁹⁾ Only one week later, on 16 January 2013, Kenyan officials seized 638 illegal elephant tusks, bound for Indonesia, which originated in Tanzania.⁽⁴⁰⁾ It seems to make little difference to poachers whether hunting is illegal or not.

Countries like Zambia and Botswana making a statement against wealthy potential hunters to conserve populations of unique wildlife was not a difficult choice. While there remain profits to be made in the trophy hunting industry, the overall monetary gain pales in comparison to the huge financial windfalls acquired annually from photographic tourism and safaris. In order to maintain the levels of species that are sufficient to encourage the continued rise in tourism, both countries made a conscious decision to support more profits and better ecological conservation management.

In certain areas, the utilisation of private hunting enterprises may benefit the reintroduction of species, but the numbers are not overwhelming enough, when weighed against the monetary gain of maintaining animal levels for photographic tourism, to warrant a reversal on current hunting bans. It is also clear that poaching will occur whether hunting is permitted or not, so critics that infer that hunting bans encourage poaching fail to present a convincing argument. Critics of sport hunting bans will find that with the rising number of tourists flocking to conservation areas, the benefit of hunting bans and restrictions will win out over hunting profits. While there may be a time when hunting is necessary if there is resurgence in certain species, for now, saving the species is more vital to African nations.

Written by Daniel R. Donovan ⁽¹⁾

NOTES:

(1) Contact Daniel R. Donovan through Consultancy Africa Intelligence’s Africa Watch Unit ( africa.watch@consultancyafrica.com). This CAI discussion paper was developed with the assistance of Claire Furphy and was edited by Nicky Berg.
(2) Boyes, S., ‘No more hunting of any kind in Botswana…’, National Geographic, 15 November 2012, http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com.
(3) Ibid.
(4) Mfulua, C., ‘Zambia bans hunting of endangered lions, leopards’, Reuters, 10 January 2013, http://www.reuters.com.
(5) Ibid.
(6) Lee, R.B. and Hitchcock, R.K., 2001. African hunter-gatherers: Survival, history, and the politics of identity. African Study Monographs, 26, pp. 257-280.
(7) Steinhart, E.I., 1989. Hunting in colonial Kenya. Journal of African History, 30, pp. 247-264.
(8) Ibid.
(9) Ibid.
(10) Dana, R., ‘Big game hunting: The 1%’s new favorite hobby’, Newsweek, 2 April 2012, http://www.thedailybeast.com.
(11) Steinhart, E.I., 1989. Hunting in colonial Kenya. Journal of African History, 30, pp. 247-264.
(12) Ibid.
(13) Ibid.
(14) Dana, R., ‘Big game hunting: The 1%’s new favorite hobby’, Newsweek, 2 April 2012, http://www.thedailybeast.com.
(15) Ibid.; The ‘Big Five’ consists of the Cape buffalo, lion, elephant, rhinoceros and leopard.
(16) Gatehouse, G., ‘African elephant poaching threatens wildlife future’, BBC News, 15 January 2013, http://www.bbc.co.uk.
(17) Ibid.; McGrath, M., ‘Rhino poaching in South Africa reaches record levels’, BBC News, 10 January 2013, http://www.bbc.co.uk.
(18) Lindsey, P.A., Roulet, P.A. and Romañach, S.S., 2007. Economic and conservationist significance of the trophy hunting industry in sub-Saharan Africa. Biological Conservation, 134(1), pp. 455-469.
(19) Ibid.
(20) ‘Molewa: Hunting brings much to South Africa's economy’, Mail and Guardian, 30 October 2011, http://mg.co.za.
(21) Ibid.
(22) Ibid.
(23) ‘Hunting the Big 5 in Africa’, Hunting Legends, 2013, http://www.huntinglegends.com; The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (Cites) terms agreed to in 2009, allowed Namibia and South Africa five black rhino trophy hunts every year until 2011 provided it be done on a sustainable basis. South African Minister of Water and Environmental Affairs, Bomo Molewa, has since published the Biodiversity Management Plan for the Black Rhinoceros, which includes the limited and regulated hunting of up to five bulls per year to manage the surplus male problem. See Knight M.H., Balfour, D. and Emslie, R.H., ‘Biodiversity Management Plan for the Black Rhinoceros (Diceros bicorris) in South Africa for 2011-2020’, Government Gazette, 25 January 2013, http://www.environment.gov.za.
(24) ‘Botswana’, CIA WorldFactbook, November 2011, https://www.cia.gov.
(25) Lindsey, P.A., Roulet, P.A. and Romañach, S.S., 2007. Economic and conservationist significance of the trophy hunting industry in sub-Saharan Africa’, Biological Conservation, 134(1), pp. 455-469.
(26) ‘Botswana to ban hunting over wildlife species decline’, BBC News, 29 November 2012, http://www.bbc.co.uk.
(27) Boyes, S., ‘No more hunting of any kind in Botswana…’, National Geographic, 15 November 2012, http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com.
(28) Ibid.
(29) Mfulua, C., ‘Zambia bans hunting of endangered lions, leopards’, Reuters, 10 January 2013, http://www.reuters.com.
(30) Pickrell, J., ‘Trophy hunting can help African conservation, study says’, National Geographic News, 15 March 2007, http://news.nationalgeographic.com.
(31) Ibid.
(32) Lindsey, P.A., Roulet, P.A. and Romañach, S.S., 2007. Economic and conservationist significance of the trophy hunting industry in sub-Saharan Africa’, Biological Conservation, 134(1), pp. 455-469.
(33) Ibid.
(34) Hopkins, C., ‘Hunting is saving Africa’s wildlife’, American Hunter, 12 May 2010, http://www.americanhunter.org.
(35) Ibid.
(36) Ibid.
(37) Lindsey, P.A., Roulet, P.A. and Romañach, S.S., 2007. Economic and conservationist significance of the trophy hunting industry in sub-Saharan Africa’, Biological Conservation, 134(1), pp. 455-469.
(38) McGrath, M., ‘Rhino poaching in South Africa reaches record levels’, BBC News, 10 January 2013, http://www.bbc.co.uk.
(39) ‘Kenya hunts for armed elephant-poachers’, Al-Jazeera, 8 January 2013, http://www.aljazeera.com.
(40) Odula, T., ‘638 illegal elephant tusks found at Kenyan port’, The Guardian, 16 January 2013, http://www.guardian.co.uk.