20 Mar 2024

The proposed Hunting Trophies (Import Prohibition) Bill, due to be tabled for a second reading before the British Parliament tomorrow, is not a solution to global conservation concerns, but could instead harm efforts Botswana and Southern African states have made towards sustainable environmental protection.

This was revealed by Professor Joseph Mbaiwa of the Okavango Research Institute of the University of Botswana when presenting a public lecture on Hunting Trophies (Import Prohibition) Bill at the University of Oxford.

Presenting a scientific paper on the debate at the invite of the Wildlife Conservation Research Unit (Wildcru), a part of the University of Oxford’s Zoology Department, Prof. Mbaiwa said past experience when trophy hunting was banned showed negative consequences on wildlife.

“The bill should draw experience from case studies on what happens to wildlife conservation when a trophy hunting ban is effected. During the trophy hunting ban in Kenya between 1977 and 1996, a 40 per cent decline in wildlife was experienced in that country. 

In Zambia when a trophy hunting ban was introduced in the Luangwa valley, a community conservation project collapsed, while rhino and elephant populations declined,” Prof. Mbaiwa said.

Furthermore, he said the hunting ban in Botswana between 2014 and 2019 led to increased poaching, increased incidents of crop damage by wildlife, increased livestock predation, reduced benefits to communities from wildlife and indiscriminate wildlife killings.

He added that the case studies confirmed the social exchange conservation theory that posits that successful wildlife conservation occurred when local people had a sense of ownership of animal resource management. 

He said they partnered with government and other stakeholders to realise economic benefits and felt the need to ensure animal protection.

He told his audience of British academics, Oxford students and the visiting Botswana delegation that the conservation theory could be compromised if the British bill was passed.

“The Hunting Trophies (Import Prohibition) Bill seeks to ban the importation of legally obtained wildlife trophies, which would affect Botswana and other Southern African countries. 

This bill, if passed, could compromise the livelihood of communities living in wildlife areas,” Prof. Mbaiwa said.

He noted that in 2022-2023, over US$9 million was generated by community-based organisations from concession fees, including trophy hunting, and that over 7 000 people in Botswana were employed by the community-based organisations.

Prof. Mbaiwa further argued that hunting in Botswana was ‘controlled and undertaken under the guidance of scientifically tested approaches, a CITES based hunting quota; selective targeted hunting that did not allow the hunting of species with lower numbers such as rhinos, or breeding females and young animals across other species; and hunting only being allowed in selected, marginal areas.

He also noted that Botswana was ranked number one in the world on the megafauna conservation index on animal conservation due to policies and approaches such as Community Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM).

Speaking at the same event, Kgosi Tawana II of Batawana in Ngamiland said conservation was not a Western concept, and that communities had over centuries subsisted alongside wildlife. 

He said they also used tribal concepts such as the totem, where Bangwato would protect phuti (ducker) and not consume it, or Bakwena and Bangwaketse would similarly protect the kwena (crocodile), the Barolong the tholo (kudu). Batlokwa protect thakadu.

He said in his area the people had founded Moremi Game Reserve decades ago to fulfil their community-based conservation. 

He added that having done well with the bottom up consultative wildlife management style over the years, his people felt ‘belittled or undermined’ by the value judgement of those who made decisions on their resources without consulting them.

Prof. Amy Dickman, a wildlife conservation lecturer at Oxford University, who has done conservation work in Tanzania and extensively published on wildlife conservation, said the impending bill was ‘neo-colonial and racist’. 

He said it assumed that the European imperial powers had a better understanding of conservation in Africa than the indigenous people.

She said if the moral concern was trophy hunting and conservation, the legislators would be seeking to ban trophy hunting in the UK itself and that empirical research had not shown controlled trophy hunting to be leading to the decline of species anywhere.

“A ban is likely to harm conservation as uncontrolled animal herds could increase the threat to biodiversity through the loss of natural habitat and illegal killing. 

Revenue from trophy hunting helps maintain wild areas and fund anti-poaching. Removing this means huge wild areas in Africa could eventually be converted to other land uses such as farming,” Prof. Dickman said. BOPAThe proposed Hunting Trophies (Import Prohibition) Bill, due to be tabled for a second reading before the British Parliament tomorrow, is not a solution to global conservation concerns, but could instead harm efforts Botswana and Southern African states have made towards sustainable environmental protection.

This was revealed by Professor Joseph Mbaiwa of the Okavango Research Institute of the University of Botswana when presenting a public lecture on Hunting Trophies (Import Prohibition) Bill at the University of Oxford.

Presenting a scientific paper on the debate at the invite of the Wildlife Conservation Research Unit (Wildcru), a part of the University of Oxford’s Zoology Department, Prof. Mbaiwa said past experience when trophy hunting was banned showed negative consequences on wildlife.

“The bill should draw experience from case studies on what happens to wildlife conservation when a trophy hunting ban is effected. During the trophy hunting ban in Kenya between 1977 and 1996, a 40 per cent decline in wildlife was experienced in that country. 

In Zambia when a trophy hunting ban was introduced in the Luangwa valley, a community conservation project collapsed, while rhino and elephant populations declined,” Prof. Mbaiwa said.

Furthermore, he said the hunting ban in Botswana between 2014 and 2019 led to increased poaching, increased incidents of crop damage by wildlife, increased livestock predation, reduced benefits to communities from wildlife and indiscriminate wildlife killings.

He added that the case studies confirmed the social exchange conservation theory that posits that successful wildlife conservation occurred when local people had a sense of ownership of animal resource management. 

He said they partnered with government and other stakeholders to realise economic benefits and felt the need to ensure animal protection.

He told his audience of British academics, Oxford students and the visiting Botswana delegation that the conservation theory could be compromised if the British bill was passed.

“The Hunting Trophies (Import Prohibition) Bill seeks to ban the importation of legally obtained wildlife trophies, which would affect Botswana and other Southern African countries. 

This bill, if passed, could compromise the livelihood of communities living in wildlife areas,” Prof. Mbaiwa said.

He noted that in 2022-2023, over US$9 million was generated by community-based organisations from concession fees, including trophy hunting, and that over 7 000 people in Botswana were employed by the community-based organisations.

Prof. Mbaiwa further argued that hunting in Botswana was ‘controlled and undertaken under the guidance of scientifically tested approaches, a CITES based hunting quota; selective targeted hunting that did not allow the hunting of species with lower numbers such as rhinos, or breeding females and young animals across other species; and hunting only being allowed in selected, marginal areas.

He also noted that Botswana was ranked number one in the world on the megafauna conservation index on animal conservation due to policies and approaches such as Community Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM).

Speaking at the same event, Kgosi Tawana II of Batawana in Ngamiland said conservation was not a Western concept, and that communities had over centuries subsisted alongside wildlife. 

He said they also used tribal concepts such as the totem, where Bangwato would protect phuti (ducker) and not consume it, or Bakwena and Bangwaketse would similarly protect the kwena (crocodile), the Barolong the tholo (kudu). Batlokwa protect thakadu.

He said in his area the people had founded Moremi Game Reserve decades ago to fulfil their community-based conservation. 

He added that having done well with the bottom up consultative wildlife management style over the years, his people felt ‘belittled or undermined’ by the value judgement of those who made decisions on their resources without consulting them.

Prof. Amy Dickman, a wildlife conservation lecturer at Oxford University, who has done conservation work in Tanzania and extensively published on wildlife conservation, said the impending bill was ‘neo-colonial and racist’. 

He said it assumed that the European imperial powers had a better understanding of conservation in Africa than the indigenous people.

She said if the moral concern was trophy hunting and conservation, the legislators would be seeking to ban trophy hunting in the UK itself and that empirical research had not shown controlled trophy hunting to be leading to the decline of species anywhere.

“A ban is likely to harm conservation as uncontrolled animal herds could increase the threat to biodiversity through the loss of natural habitat and illegal killing. 

Revenue from trophy hunting helps maintain wild areas and fund anti-poaching. Removing this means huge wild areas in Africa could eventually be converted to other land uses such as farming,” Prof. Dickman said. EndsThe proposed Hunting Trophies (Import Prohibition) Bill, due to be tabled for a second reading before the British Parliament tomorrow, is not a solution to global conservation concerns, but could instead harm efforts Botswana and Southern African states have made towards sustainable environmental protection.

This was revealed by Professor Joseph Mbaiwa of the Okavango Research Institute of the University of Botswana when presenting a public lecture on Hunting Trophies (Import Prohibition) Bill at the University of Oxford.

Presenting a scientific paper on the debate at the invite of the Wildlife Conservation Research Unit (Wildcru), a part of the University of Oxford’s Zoology Department, Prof. Mbaiwa said past experience when trophy hunting was banned showed negative consequences on wildlife.

“The bill should draw experience from case studies on what happens to wildlife conservation when a trophy hunting ban is effected. During the trophy hunting ban in Kenya between 1977 and 1996, a 40 per cent decline in wildlife was experienced in that country. 

In Zambia when a trophy hunting ban was introduced in the Luangwa valley, a community conservation project collapsed, while rhino and elephant populations declined,” Prof. Mbaiwa said.

Furthermore, he said the hunting ban in Botswana between 2014 and 2019 led to increased poaching, increased incidents of crop damage by wildlife, increased livestock predation, reduced benefits to communities from wildlife and indiscriminate wildlife killings.

He added that the case studies confirmed the social exchange conservation theory that posits that successful wildlife conservation occurred when local people had a sense of ownership of animal resource management. 

He said they partnered with government and other stakeholders to realise economic benefits and felt the need to ensure animal protection.

He told his audience of British academics, Oxford students and the visiting Botswana delegation that the conservation theory could be compromised if the British bill was passed.

“The Hunting Trophies (Import Prohibition) Bill seeks to ban the importation of legally obtained wildlife trophies, which would affect Botswana and other Southern African countries. 

This bill, if passed, could compromise the livelihood of communities living in wildlife areas,” Prof. Mbaiwa said.

He noted that in 2022-2023, over US$9 million was generated by community-based organisations from concession fees, including trophy hunting, and that over 7 000 people in Botswana were employed by the community-based organisations.

Prof. Mbaiwa further argued that hunting in Botswana was ‘controlled and undertaken under the guidance of scientifically tested approaches, a CITES based hunting quota; selective targeted hunting that did not allow the hunting of species with lower numbers such as rhinos, or breeding females and young animals across other species; and hunting only being allowed in selected, marginal areas.

He also noted that Botswana was ranked number one in the world on the megafauna conservation index on animal conservation due to policies and approaches such as Community Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM).

Speaking at the same event, Kgosi Tawana II of Batawana in Ngamiland said conservation was not a Western concept, and that communities had over centuries subsisted alongside wildlife. 

He said they also used tribal concepts such as the totem, where Bangwato would protect phuti (ducker) and not consume it, or Bakwena and Bangwaketse would similarly protect the kwena (crocodile), the Barolong the tholo (kudu). Batlokwa protect thakadu.

He said in his area the people had founded Moremi Game Reserve decades ago to fulfil their community-based conservation. 

He added that having done well with the bottom up consultative wildlife management style over the years, his people felt ‘belittled or undermined’ by the value judgement of those who made decisions on their resources without consulting them.

Prof. Amy Dickman, a wildlife conservation lecturer at Oxford University, who has done conservation work in Tanzania and extensively published on wildlife conservation, said the impending bill was ‘neo-colonial and racist’. 

He said it assumed that the European imperial powers had a better understanding of conservation in Africa than the indigenous people.

She said if the moral concern was trophy hunting and conservation, the legislators would be seeking to ban trophy hunting in the UK itself and that empirical research had not shown controlled trophy hunting to be leading to the decline of species anywhere.

“A ban is likely to harm conservation as uncontrolled animal herds could increase the threat to biodiversity through the loss of natural habitat and illegal killing. 

Revenue from trophy hunting helps maintain wild areas and fund anti-poaching. Removing this means huge wild areas in Africa could eventually be converted to other land uses such as farming,” Prof. Dickman said. Ends