International Hunting

1. Hunting has contributed to the significant expansion of wildlife inhabiting land outside of National Parks. Hunting revenues and benefits justify the use of land for wildlife instead of human-focused uses like agriculture and grazing.
2. A 2007 study found that hunting areas in sub-Saharan Africa protected approximately 344 million acres of wildlife habitat, exceeding the total size of the region’s national parks by 22%.
3. Hunting areas are more than 5 times the size of the U.S. National Park System, roughly three times the size of the U.S. National Wilderness Preservation System, and over twice the size of the U.S. National Wildlife Refuge System.
4. Protected areas that rely on regulated hunting have significantly increased since 2007, as a result of Trans-Frontier Conservation Areas, new or expanded private conservancies and ranches, and investments in community-based conservation programs.
5. For example, communal conservancies in Namibia alone have grown from 35,000 km² in 2004 to over 166,000 km² today.
6. Hunting helps reduce the impact of climate change by preserving forest and ground cover, and preventing burning and conversion to agricultural or grazing. For example, see below (photo credit: Mike Angelides) the stark contrast in protected game reserve to converted community area.
7. In these conservancies, hunting income generated N$ 34,586,452 (approximately US$ 2.4 million in 2019 and 473,956 kilograms of meat distributed to conservancy residents valued at N$ 11,374,944 (approximately US$ 792,000).
8. Almost 55% of the hunting revenues in Namibia’s communal conservancies come from elephant hunting alone. These revenues benefit approximately 220,000 people.
9. Community-based conservation areas in Zimbabwe have also benefited from hunting; in the period 2010-2015, hunting fees from six species (elephant, buffalo, leopard, hippo, crocodile, and lion) exceeded $11 million.
10. The African countries that incorporate regulated hunting into their national conservation programs are extremely successful in conserving large mammals. A recent study ranked Botswana, Namibia, Tanzania, and Zimbabwe among the top five countries for megafauna conservation, and Zambia and Mozambique among the top 15—all ahead of the U.S.
11. These countries have the largest populations of lions, elephant, rhinos, giraffe, and many other animals in the world.
12. Hunters generate significant revenues per person. In Tanzania, in the period 2008-2011, hunting generated over $75 million for the economy.  700 hunters generated total revenue of US$ 15.9 million in the fiscal year 2012/2013.  Elephant hunting alone generated $2.5 million.
13. Hunting provides the most important source of revenue for many range state wildlife authorities. For example, in a three-year period, hunting generated over $65.7 million for the wildlife authorities of Mozambique, Tanzania, Zambia, and Zimbabwe to use for wildlife conservation, management, research, law enforcement, and compensation payments (for damage caused by wildlife to property or human health).
14. In the same period, hunting generated $2.4 million (without including fees from black rhino hunts) for Namibia’s Game Products Trust Fund. These funds are reinvested in wildlife conservation.  (Note: This amount represents only funds from hunting fees that accrued to Namibia’s wildlife authority, not fees that accrued to communal conservancies or Namibia’s many freehold conservancies.)
15. Before the moratorium on hunting in Botswana, 75% of revenues for community-based conservation came from hunting (approximately US$ 3 million in 2009 to 2010). Similarly, hunting generates around 50% of community benefits from conservancies in Namibia, including monies, meat, and social benefits; much of the revenue is then reinvested into wildlife conservation and management.
16. Hunting is a market-based tool to raise revenue and incentivize wildlife conservation, in a way that reduces dependence on foreign aid.
17. Hunting is self-regulating, as a sizable population must exist to sustain a harvest for future seasons.
18. Wildlife managers frequently set limits on the amount of hunting (i.e., quotas) to reduce human-wildlife conflicts and achieve population control objectives and a sustainable offtake.
19. Hunting quotas are set based on characteristics of the species. Quotas typically take into account the population size, age and sex ratios, population growth rates, habitat carrying capacity, natural and human-caused mortality, and other factors that affect how quickly a population increases.
20. Bontebok, a type of endangered antelope, has seen significant population growth because hunting has provided financial incentives for reintroduction and increasing the herd size of private landowners.
21. Similarly, in 2016, the international community agreed to reduce trade restrictions on Cape mountain zebra, a type of endangered zebra in South Africa, to encourage more hunting of the species and thus to incentivize private landowners to continue to expand the habitat available for this species.
22. International hunting has contributed to the recovery of the southern white rhino, from 1,800 in 1968 to approximately 19,000 in 2018.
23. The most robust black rhino populations exist largely because of habitat protected, and anti-poaching efforts funded, by hunting. Examples include Namibia, which contains the largest free-ranging black rhino population in the world, Zimbabwe’s private conservancies, and private land in South Africa.
24. Black rhino are one of many examples of hunting as a population management tool. Older males are individually selected for hunting when they are no longer reproducing effectively and interfering with breeding by younger males.
25. By using hunting to control “surplus” male black rhino, Namibia and South Africa have managed for high population growth and reduced intra-species conflicts.
26. Over 90% of the global white rhino population and over 70% of the black rhino population lives in Namibia and South Africa. According to the IUCN African Rhino Specialist Group, “both species of rhino have increased considerably since sport hunting of white and black rhino resumed in 1968 and 2005 respectively.”
27. The hunting is very sustainable: approximately 83 white rhino and five black rhino are hunted each year across the two countries, representing only .50% and 0.13% of the current white and black rhino populations, respectively, in the two countries.
28. Almost all of the world’s approximately 32,000 wild lions inhabit the southern African countries where they are hunted.
29. Sustainable elephant hunting quotas are set at approximately 5% of the hunted population. This means that for every elephant hunted, there must be a population of at least 200 elephants.
30. For lions, hunting quotas are typically set at less than 5% of the population or 1 lion per 1,000 km².
31. Actual offtakes are usually well under these quotas, for reasons including hunter selectivity; the difficulty on finding, tracking, and hunting an appropriate animal; and local regulations that restrict the animals that may be legally hunted. For example, many African countries, including Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe, have set minimum age limits for lawfully hunted lions, or size limits for lawfully hunted elephants and leopards.
32. In addition to benefiting the population, hunting generates significant funding to be reinvested in further conservation activities, such as a hunter paying $350,000 to hunt a black rhino in Namibia that was post-reproductive and killing other rhinos. Those funds were invested in law enforcement training and equipment, an anti-poaching intelligence system, and a black rhino survey in Etosha National Park, Namibia.
33. Funds from hunting black rhinos in Namibia are allocated to black rhino conservation projects chosen by a five-member Board of Trustees. Recent projects have included black rhino population surveys, rhino crime investigation and prosecution, and building a rhino DNA tracking system.
34. One big difference between hunting and photographic tourism is that hunting requires a large underlying population to sustain the harvest, while photographic tourism can succeed in an area with smaller populations of wildlife.
35. Hunting can occur in areas where wildlife is not easy to spot, while photographic tourism generally requires habitat conditions that allow tourists to view animals (e.g., less dense forest, open areas, etc.).
36. Another difference is that hunters will travel to more remote areas without infrastructure, while photographic tourists tend to stay closer to airports, roads, and visitor services. Hunting and photographic tourism are often complementary, and both can benefit wildlife by expanding the habitat set aside for conservation.
37. Lions have experienced great population growth in hunted areas such as South African game preserves, private conservancies in Zimbabwe, and communal conservancies in Namibia.
38. The world’s largest lion population (> 16,000) inhabits Tanzania, which has stringent hunting regulations for lion including an age requirement (six years).
39. Due to these stringent regulations, the number of lions hunted per year in Tanzania is very low—only approximately 54 lions per year in the period 2011-2015, and only 39 lions were hunted in 2015.
40. The total number of wild lions hunted across southern Africa is equally low. The average number of lions hunted per year across southern Africa is only about 110-120 lions.
41. Kenya’s wildlife declined by ~70% when it closed hunting in 1977. A recent study compared the decline in wildlife in Kenya with the increase in wildlife in South Africa, to conclude that policy, institutional and market failures caused this decline by restricting the opportunities of landowners to generate conservation revenues to only include photographic tourism.
42. There is a misconception that “trophy hunting” weakens species by taking the largest and most powerful animals. In reality, selective hunting focusing on larger and older animals results in the harvest of males that have usually already contributed their genetic material to breeding.
43. A 2019 study found that well-regulated hunting does not cause a change in trophy size, using exhaustive data from big horn sheep populations across North America.
44. In addition to providing funds for wildlife and habitat management, international hunting can also provide funding for rehabilitation of areas and reintroduction of species, an important factor in increasing the world’s biodiversity.
45. Hunting revenues frequently fund the digging and operation of boreholes and other habitat improvement initiatives like dams and grassland/fire management. These habitat improvements provide water for wildlife in the arid African climate, expanding available habitat and reducing the need for wildlife to move long distances in search of water.
46. Hunting operators keep habitat intact and pristine, and provide important buffer zones around national parks. Flying over a hunting area compared to the surrounding countryside is eye-opening.
47. The transition to private wildlife ranching in South Africa has led to the conversion of more than 9,000 cattle farms to back wildlife and resulted in an almost 40-fold increase in large mammals in the country.
48. The largest relocation of lions ever attempted took place on a hunting coutada in Mozambique and was funded with hunting revenues and donations from the Cabela family.
49. The revenues generated by international hunting incentivize rural communities to protect wildlife and resources.
50. As human populations expand, human-wildlife conflict necessarily increases, and rural communities dependent on natural resources must benefit from wildlife to willingly share the habitat.
51. The hunting industry directly provides over 53,000 jobs in eight African countries. This does not include the multiplied effect of tourism-related and other jobs (e.g., restaurant employees, transport employees).
52. The hunting industry creates employment in some of the most remote areas, where there are few other options besides subsistence agriculture.
53. The individual contributions of hunting operators to anti-poaching and community development are impressive. For example, one operator in Zimbabwe spends an average of $85,000/year on anti-poaching.  From 2010 to 2016, their efforts led to an 80% decline in elephant poaching in an important border region.
54. This company operates a true joint venture with the local CAMPFIRE community in Zimbabwe, sharing half of the hunting revenues and contributing important social services.
55. For example, one operator in Tanzania runs two year-round anti-poaching patrols, including boat patrols to reduce poaching along the concessions’ 40 kilometer border on Lake Rukwa. These efforts have reduced poaching to negligible levels and greatly increased wildlife in the area.
56. Hunting generates more revenue from fewer tourists compared with photographic tourism.
57. A 2016 study of community conservancies in Namibia found that benefits from hunting tourism and photographic tourism were roughly equal but accrued differently. Hunting tourism benefits (fees and game meat) supported conservancy operations and the community as a whole; photo-tourism benefits (primarily salaries) supported individuals.
58. The 2016 study found that a ban on hunting would shut down 84% of community conservancies, which rely on hunting revenues to cover operating costs. A ban on photographic tourism would also have a negative effect, “but less marked,” as 59% of conservancies would remain able to cover their operating costs.
59. The negative impact of a hunting ban was demonstrated in Botswana, as the 2014 moratorium on hunting led to some of the most successful community trusts left bankrupt.
60. Community benefits from hunting accrue as employment, and also funding for law enforcement and community game guards. For example, in the period 2010-2015, CAMPFIRE communities invested approximately $1.8 million on law enforcement and employment of 168 game guards.  Those game guards undertook over 3,000 patrol days.
61. In the same 2010-2015 period, CAMPFIRE communities invested approximately $700,000 on social services like the building of schools and clinics, improvements in water infrastructure, purchase of food stores and school supplies, assistance to wildlife victims, direct payments to households, and much more.
62. In Mozambique, the Tchuma Tchato community has seen improvements in the clean drinking water supply, road construction, emergency transport, and construction of a school due to revenue-sharing arrangements with the local hunting operator.
63. Communities who live side-by-side with wildlife appreciate the benefits from regulated hunting. A July 2020 letter from 50 community leaders representing millions of rural people across southern Africa urged celebrity animal rights activists to stop trying to end hunting and to respect their right and ability to manage wildlife.
64. Hunting operators fund anti-poaching programs, which reduces the national government’s law enforcement burden and employs local community members.
65. Bushmeat is often illegally harvested to supply protein to rural and impoverished communities; hunting reduces illegal offtakes by providing game meat to communities.
66. Most southern African countries require (by lease or regulation) that hunting operators conduct anti-poaching. Operators regularly invest far more than the minimum.  For example, a 2016 study found hunting 27 hunting companies in Tanzania invested $6.7 million in anti-poaching in the period 2013-2015—way above the minimum of $5,000/year required by Tanzania’s Wildlife Conservation (Tourist Hunting) regulations.
67. The eleven Tanzanian companies reporting specific anti-poaching success conducted 7,170 patrol days; arrested 1,409 poachers; removed 6,233 snares and gin traps; collected 171 firearms and 1,557 rounds of ammunition; confiscated 704 vehicles and 1,118 other weapons.
68. In addition to running their own anti-poaching teams, many operators in Tanzania help reduce poaching by funding projects in surrounding communities—although they are hunting on state-owned (not communal) lands—to help invest these communities in wildlife conservation and to draw a direct link between wildlife and livelihood improvements. The 2016 study found the 27 companies invested $3.1 million in the period 2013-2015 in community projects.
69. These operators funded healthcare, education, infrastructure development, and many more types of social services. As just one example among many, hunting operators in Tanzania constructed two clinics and two medicine dispensaries, installed solar lighting and a solar water heater for a maternity ward, donated 254 sets of eye-glasses, treated 1,575 eye ailments, and established a network of Village Health Workers conducting monthly health clinics.
70. Altogether, an analysis prepared by the Tanzanian wildlife authority found that hunting operators contributed approximately $19.5 million dollars in conservation of wildlife in the period 2013-2016.
71. As another example, one operator in Mozambique funds a 22 person anti-poaching team, which runs year-round, regular patrols to deter commercial bushmeat, subsistence, and ivory poaching. The team is supported by a Land Cruiser and five bush bikes—all funded by hunting revenues and donations from hunting clients.
72. A 2017 study concluded that the 2014 hunting moratorium in Botswana contributed to increased levels of poaching and human-wildlife conflicts.
73. Most protected areas managed for photographic tourism alone are insufficiently funded; hunting helps generate additional funding for government law enforcement efforts.
74. Hunting provides significant incentives for habitat conservation and, therefore, sustains greater wildlife populations. Compare Kenya (580,367 km² total size), which has approximately 8% of its landmass (46,429 km²) protected in parks and reserves, and numerous sanctuaries and conservancies, with the much smaller Zimbabwe (390,757 km² total size), which has approximately 25% of its landmass set aside in national parks (27,177 km²), safari areas (18,919 km²), primary CAMPFIRE Areas (37,542 km²), and private wildlife conservancies (13,082 km²)—a total of 96,720 km² of viable wildlife habitat.  Unsurprisingly, Zimbabwe’s elephant population (82,630 in 2016) is estimated to be almost four times that of Kenya (22,809).
75. One reason that Kenya’s elephant population is lower than Zimbabwe’s is the proliferation of domestic livestock following the closure of hunting in 1977. Domestic animals including sheep, goats, camels, and donkeys all increased, creating a livestock biomass 8.1 times more than the biomass of wildlife in the country.
76. The CAMPFIRE program in Zimbabwe, which is funded 90% by hunting, benefits 777,000 households—25% of all households in the country.
77. Local communities in Namibia and Zimbabwe receive 100% of trophy fees on communal lands.
78. In Tanzania and Zambia, local communities receive 50%–65% of trophy fees, and in Mozambique they receive 20-33% of these fees. Communities also receive other fees like lease payments and daily rates; operator investments that are required by their lease agreements; and game meat distributions.
79. A 2015 study found that approximately 130,000 kilograms of fresh game meat (over 140 tons and a critical source of protein) was provisioned annually by the hunting industry to rural communities in Zambia (worth approximately $600,000 on the market).
80. During Botswana’s moratorium on hunting on state and communal lands, rural residents previously employed by the hunting industry lost their jobs and other benefits, like the distribution of game meat.
81. Rural communities can benefit from hunting, even when it does not take place in rural areas. In Tanzania, safari operators on government-leased concessions invest in community livelihoods on average $1 million/year.  In Zimbabwe, two private, fenced conservancies fund projects for surrounding communities and share game meat worth hundreds of thousands of dollars per year.
82. Hunting operators in Zimbabwe’s Savé Valley Conservancy employ around 150 anti-poaching game scouts.
83. Anti-poaching scouts employed by the Savé Valley Conservancy and Bubyé Valley Conservancy, two large private conservancies in Zimbabwe that are wholly funded by hunting revenues, help protect one of the world’s largest black rhino populations—which is protected by these hunting revenues, but is not hunted.
84. A study of rural community members in Namibia found that 91% opposed any ban on hunting.
85. Research from the IUCN African Rhino Specialist Group found that for a South African reserve protecting 195 white rhino (and many other species), only ~18% of the operational expenditure was generated from non-consumptive tourism; 63% was generated by hunting.
86. Regulated hunting is completely different than “canned” lion hunting that sometimes takes place in South Africa. Most hunting takes place on government- or community-owned land leased by hunting operators.  These hunting areas are not fenced, and hunting operators are bound to engage in fair-chase hunting by national regulations and the terms of their lease agreements.  Moreover, most hunting in South Africa, while it takes place on game ranches, is not “canned,” in that the game lives wild on the property and is not specially placed for the hunt.
87. Major pro-hunting organizations, including Safari Club International, have taken public positions opposing canned lion hunting.
88. Canned lion hunting represents only a very small part of South Africa’s game ranching industry. Approximately 50 million acres of private ranchlands are being primarily managed for wildlife—completely separate from canned lion facilities.  These lands contain approximately 12 million head of game, twice the number found in South Africa’s national park system.  These ranches collectively generate approximately $1.6 billion in income/year from the sale of hunts and game meat derived from those hunts.
89. Professional hunters and guides are licensed and bound by law, as well as the ethical guidelines of their associations.
90. International hunting can provide a more environmentally-friendly alternative to expanding photographic tourism because it generates fewer carbon emissions from travel, does not depend on a high-level of infrastructure development, and avoiding habitat degradation.
91. In Botswana before the hunting ban, hunters made up 1% of tourism arrivals but generated 15% of tourism revenues, making it a low-impact, high-revenue generator.
92. Most elephants inhabit the southern African countries where they are hunted.
93. Elephants in some parts of southern Africa have been so successful that they have exceeded the habitat’s carrying capacity and are expanding in range, which in turn leads to increasing human-wildlife conflicts.
94. Hunting, of elephants and other species, has been demonstrated to help reduce conflicts by managing population sizes.
95. In the eyes of rural communities sharing their habitat, elephants are often dangerous liabilities. The cost in dollars and lives of human-elephant conflict is high.
96. Hunting of African species is carefully regulated by the range states. Most species of concern (e.g., elephant, lion, leopard, rhino) are protected by the laws of these countries, and may only be hunted in certain circumstances, under quotas, and pursuant to licenses and permits issued by the national wildlife authority.
97. International trade in elephants, lions, leopards, rhinos, and other species of concern is also regulated by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES).Under this international treaty, these species may only be hunted and exported from the range state when “not detrimental” to the survival of the species in the wild.
98. The range states make science-based non-detriment findings, such as recent non-detriment findings for leopard submitted to the CITES Animals Committee.
99. Range nations manage their species of concern pursuant to science-backed management plans, developed in cooperation with stakeholders like leading scientists, rural communities, and safari tourism (photographic and hunting) operators.Examples include Zimbabwe’s National Elephant Management Plan, Tanzania’s Lion and Leopard Conservation Plan, Namibia’s Black Rhino Management Strategy, Mozambique’s Lion Action Plan, numerous Biodiversity Management Plans in South Africa, and many more.
100. Hunting can greatly reduce problem animal control (PAC) in communal areas. In Zimbabwe from 2011 to 2015, leopard hunts generated almost $500,000 for rural communities, and there were zero reported PAC offtakes in the communal areas where these leopard were hunted.
101. Range state management planning and hunting quotas are guided by the best available science. Range states conduct research programs and wildlife surveys, where feasible, to guide their decision-making.  For example, the five nations that make up the Kavango-Zambezi Trans-Frontier Conservation Area are coordinating an international elephant survey.  Namibia (with the support of the hunting community) recently conducted a national leopard survey.

• Informing Decisions on Trophy Hunting
• The Baby and the Bathwater: Trophy Hunting, Conservation and Rural Livelihoods
• Loved to Death? The Risks of Simplistic Campaigning for Wildlife Conservation
• The Conservation Equation in Africa
• Opinion: CT's ban of 6 African species would hurt, not save, wildlife
• Commentary: How California legislation would be harmful for African conservation efforts
• Ban on hunting trophies risks funding for healthy African ecosystems
• Community Leaders Network Letter to Celebrities
• Namibian Association of CBNRM Support Organisations Letter to EP
• IUCN SULi Letter to MEPs Re EP's resolution on the EU Biodiversity Strategy
• Letter from the SADC Group of Ambassadors
• Southern African countries to lose billions as UK plans to ban importation of hunting

For a complete list of resources, visit SCI's Full Research Library

Visit SCI's Full Video Library