Originally posted by an anti hunter. However it makes excellent arguments in support of hunting. Also good discussion on corruption of course.

http://www.kent.ac.uk/dice/pub..._hunting_chapter.pdf

My response to there posting it.

While not advocating corruption, strictly from the animal’s perspective it doesn’t really matter who gets paid what so long as they have habitat.

Under hunting 25 per cent of Tanzania’s land surface was kept wild.

The Wildlife Department took over management of the increasingly lucrative tourist hunting industry in 1988, while TAWICO continued to offer hunting opportunities like other outfitters. To increase hunting opportunities, the Wildlife Department close to doubled the numbers of hunting blocks to c.130. These covered ~180,000 km2 or ~25 per cent of Tanzania’s land surface, and were evenly distributed between unoccupied game reserves and areas occupied by people, thereby offering tourist hunting the opportunity to contribute to community-based conservation (PAWM, 1996a; Nshala, 2001).

And an example of how an outfitter takes care of there hunting block;

Thus a study of lions in an area of Selous Game Reserve retained by the same outfi tter since 1967 suggested that existing quotas were too high, but that actual off takes were much lower than those allowed by the quota and appeared sustainable (Creel & Creel, 1997).

And what happens when you stop hunting;

The 50,000 km2 Selous Game Reserve (SGR) is the best known hunting area in Tanzania. Currently a World Heritage Site and an IUCN Category IV protected area, SGR has long been supported through revenue from tourist hunting (Nicholson, 1970, 2001). The management of SGR collapsed following the hunting ban in the mid-1970s, and by the late 1980s its annual operating budget from the Treasury was US$150,000, equivalent to US$ 3 per km2. Meanwhile,commercial poaching for ivory, rhino horn and meat reduced SGR’s elephant population from 110,000 in the mid-1970s to less than 30,000 in 1989, while black rhinos were reduced from over 3000 to probably less than 100 (Siege, 2000). Wildlife staff were allegedly instrumental in the poaching, acting on orders from their superiors or from politicians.

Wow… did you even read this before posting it?

Tourist hunting provided around 90 per cent of all SGR’s retained revenue, while more than 100 photo graphic tourists were needed to achieve the returns derived from a single tourist hunter (Planning and Assessment for Wildlife Management (PAWM), 1996d; Baldus et al., 2003

I am only about half way through... will post more

This will help keep locals involved in protecting wildlife;

The recent Wildlife Conservation (Non-Consumptive Wildlife Utilization) Regulations 2007 have concentrated all management powers and revenues centrally, instead of devolving such powers to, and sharing benefits with, local communities. Indeed, senior officials and elected politicians will resist changes to the status quo because of the wealth they accrue from current practices in recreational hunting.

Wait… what is this;

While hunting bans are widely advocated, they may remove incentives to retain land under wildlife management, whether in formally protected areas or in areas occupied by people outside more strictly protected areas (Child, 1995).

This article does nothing to dispel, in fact just the opposite it advocates for and supports, sport trophy hunting… and warns of the consequences if the anti-hunters prevail. I am all for fixing corruption in Africa. I am not going to hold my breath for it though and think we need to have conservation plans that provide habitat in spite of it. Thank you for posting this. It is a good analysis.

And then there is this little quote about someone doing it right...

Hence only a few outfitters voluntarily support communities through schemes such as the Cullman Wildlife Project (Robin Hurt Safaris, 1996), while most hesitate over community empowerment, feeling greater security in perpetuating the state-controlled monopoly over wildlife, compared with facing the unknowns of democratically
elected village committees (Nelson et al., 2007).

Now.. hmmm... where have I seen that name before... hmmm... oh wait, I know... right here
http://conservationforce.org/cullmanhurt.htm

Thats right at Conservation Force... you know the group that you love to hate because they are actually doing something effective for wildlife conservation.

Wow... in one posting you destroyed your own argument against sport trophy (or tourist) hunting. Corruption can be fixed... habitat loss can't be.