http://article.wn.com/view/201..._S_African_Wildlife/



Does Trophy Hunting Save S. African Wildlife?

Gillian Parker
August 07, 2014 11:03 AM

JOHANNESBURG—
Trophy hunting for big game is a controversial blood sport. Parts of an animal – such as the skin, horns or head – are kept as a trophy, with the carcass often used for food.

In some African countries, it is a legal and lucrative business. A 10-day "elephant package" could cost $36,000 and hunting a rhino could set you back a hefty $100,000. South Africa’s luxury tourism industry allows the hunting of elephants, rhino and other wildlife.

It is an emotionally charged issue. A 19-year-old college cheerleader from Texas provoked an uproar in July after posting pictures in which she posed with dead African wildlife she had legally hunted on a trip here.

The International Fund for Animal Welfare, an advocacy group based in Massachusetts, says in a Facebook post that the “needless killing of endangered species for trophies is inherently unsustainable, economically short-sighted, ecologically unsound and morally wrong.”

Generating funds

While many frown on the sport, some conservationists argue that trophy hunting generates crucial revenues needed for the conservation of Africa’s wildlife, including big game.

Tourism and donations do not come close to covering the billions of dollars needed, says zoologist John Hanks, former head of the World Wildlife Fund’s South Africa chapter.

“I think trophy hunting in South Africa is absolutely essential if we are going to look for long-term future for rhinos in the whole of Africa,” Hanks said. “… There’s hardly a single country anywhere that can afford to run its national parks as they should be run. … Here we are in South Africa, one of the richest countries in the continent, Kruger Park has a million visitors a year and [it] still cannot afford to defend the rhinos.”

Around 9,000 trophy hunters travel to South Africa annually – 90 percent of them from the United States. In 2012, foreign hunters spent $115 million in South Africa, where the hunting industry as a whole brings in more than $744 million annually and employs 70,000 people. It is the single most lucrative form of commercial land use.

Making an economic case

Herman Meyeridricks, president of the Professional Hunters Association of South Africa, contends legal hunting is crucial to protecting wildlife.

“The only way there will be incentive for those landowners to protect and keep on investing in rhino is if they have an economic value,” said Meyeridricks. “They can only have an economic value if there is an end-user that is willing to pay for that and that is the trophy hunter.”

Permits would not be awarded to hunters if the animals were genuinely threatened, Meyeridricks said, adding the number of those killed is “insignificant” to what is available.

The London-based advocacy group Save the Rhino counts just over 5,000 black rhinos and more than 20,400 white rhinos in Africa. More than 80 percent of the continent’s rhinos are in South Africa, National Geographic reports. The nations of Namibia and South Africa can sell five permits a year to hunters of adult black male rhinos, according to Conservation magazine.


The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species, or CITES, controls the number of animals allowed to be killed legally. Critics say the oversight body is flawed, because it leaves monitoring quotas to individual governments.

Hunting as conservation tool

Susie Offord, Save the Rhino’s deputy director, maintains trophy hunting is a useful conservation tool if managed properly.

“In an ideal world, rhinos wouldn't be under the extreme pressure they are facing today and there wouldn't be any need for trophy hunting,” Offord said. “But the reality is that wildlife conservation is incredibly expensive.”

Not every country in Africa has followed suit. Kenya has had a long-standing policy against trophy hunting. When banning it in 1977 the Kenyan government described it as “a barbaric relic of colonialism.”

Criminal networks, coined as pseudo-hunters, also have exploited trophy hunting to launder horns. They command high prices on the black market in countries such as Vietnam and Thailand.

South African officials say there have been an estimated 300 instances of rhino horn exports by pseudo-hunters since 2009. Since then, the country has stopped issuing hunting permits to nationals from the Czech Republic and Vietnam.

Conservationists such as Offord say governments need to do more to fight criminality and reinforce hunting regulations.

Poaching and illegal trade “does need to be taken more seriously by governments; it needs a lot more action,” she said, calling for “a lot more cross-border collaboration.”

Well, of course it saves So. African wildlife by giving it value. Everything has to pay it's way these days. It puts people to work as well as bringing in cash for the country's economy. It also gives the land owner who deals in hunting wildlife an insentive to raise the best trophy quality wildlife which is good for those species.

Two of the most misunderstood terms in the English language are "Priceless" and "Worthless". Too many supposed educated people view them as meaning the same thing. Nothing could be farther from the truth.

An elephant/rhino/eland/cape buffalo etc. is Priceless. In realistic terms, no value can be placed on a living, breathing entity.

Worthless means that something has No value.

Even though a monetary "value" is placed on various animals, it does not really rationalize the fact that those species in the over all scheme of things, are Priceless.

Anything that can be considered worthless has no value, even intrinsically.

If it wasn't for hunti8ng, there would be no wildlife in South Africa right now.

Plain and simple.

Where do the idiots who are against hunting think the money is coming from?

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
If it wasn't for hunti8ng, there would be no wildlife in South Africa right now.

Plain and simple.

Where do the idiots who are against hunting think the money is coming from?

Well not from them……….. they get all warm and fuzzy, thinking they have done something really nifty, if they buy a t-shirt from some animal rights group with a polar bear or wolf on it.

Many are well intentioned, but all in all are a misinformed and mindless lot.

quote:

Originally posted by Skyline:

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
If it wasn't for hunti8ng, there would be no wildlife in South Africa right now.

Plain and simple.

Where do the idiots who are against hunting think the money is coming from?

Well not from them……….. they get all warm and fuzzy, thinking they have done something really nifty, if they buy a t-shirt from some animal rights group with a polar bear or wolf on it.

Many are well intentioned, but all in all are a misinformed and mindless lot.

Not to mention, they donate to groups like the Humane Society of the US, basically a scam organization that uses something like 2% of those donations for conservation and wildlife protection -- and none of that for Africa.

These liberal groups, mostly in the US and UK, almost all seem to be for-profit entities, in reality. Their tax-free status means we are supporting them and that should be taken away from them.

it is interesting that SA won't issue rhino hunting permits to Czechs. that was news to me and i wonder why. the Vietnam thing is obvious but how about the Chinese. seems they should be on the banned list.....

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:
it is interesting that SA won't issue rhino hunting permits to Czechs. that was news to me and i wonder why. the Vietnam thing is obvious but how about the Chinese. seems they should be on the banned list.....

Why pick on certain nationalities to ban hunting?

If they meet the conditions, they should be allowed just as every one else.

Once a trophy is paid for, it is up the hunter to do with it as he sees fit.

because they are not hunting- they are collecting oriental pharmaceuticals

I grew up in Czech Republic
They have quite the Vietnamese minority population from Communist era so I assume there is connection with smuggling.
Can't come up with any other explanation. Damn Vietcong are like herpes, pop up where you least expect them

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:

quote:

Originally posted by jdollar:
it is interesting that SA won't issue rhino hunting permits to Czechs. that was news to me and i wonder why. the Vietnam thing is obvious but how about the Chinese. seems they should be on the banned list.....

Why pick on certain nationalities to ban hunting?

If they meet the conditions, they should be allowed just as every one else.

Once a trophy is paid for, it is up the hunter to do with it as he sees fit.

I think your point is well taken Saeed. If someone has booked a hunt and pays all of the appropriate fees, why can't they do what they want with the "trophy" when they have legally exported it to their country of residence?

This is really no different than allowing the country to sell rhino horn and ivory stockpiles.

If I take my elephant tusks home and pay someone to carve them into works of art, why should that be anyones concern (well okay, it just ain't right, but………). If I kill a white rhino and legally export the horns as a trophy, then decide to have a drinking cup made out of one and grind the rest up to make 'special tea'….. it was legally taken and so what?

It is no different than the convoluted mishmash of laws regarding bear gall bladders that we have in North America. In one place you simply cannot possess it, in another you can keep it for personal use, in another you can use it or GIVE it to someone that want it, but you cannot legally sell it in any jurisdiction.

Where I live you cannot possess the gall bladder from a bear. Well once you have shot it and are sitting beside it taking pictures you 'possess' it. It is why I will not gut black bears for hunters who want to take bear meat home with them. I skin the bear and then remove the quarters and the back straps for the hunters and never open up the body cavity of the bear.

Having said that, I think the laws regarding such items do not squash the market for these products, they only serve to increase the demand and price on the black market.

The US 'war on drugs' is another perfect example of a policy/regulations that has done sweet tweet to curb their illicit use. It has however, proven to be a boon for both state/federal and private sector commercial prison business and a couple of huge government bureaucracies.

At some point you would think governments the world over would step back and take a second look at these sorts of policies. In the end they usually backfire.

Good point Skyline......