Trophy hunting almost worthless according to a new report

Economics of Trophy Hunting in Africa Are Overrated and Overstated

June 2013. A new report that analyses literature on the economics of trophy hunting reveals that African countries and rural communities derive very little benefit from trophy hunting revenue. The study, authored by Economists at Large-commissioned by the International Fund for Animal Welfare (IFAW), The Humane Society of the United States, Humane Society International and Born Free USA/Born Free Foundation-comes amid consideration to grant the African lion protection under the U.S. Endangered Species Act (ESA).

“The suggestion that trophy hunting plays a significant role in African economic development is misguided,” said economist Rod Campbell, lead author of the study. “Revenues constitute only a fraction of a percent of GDP and almost none of that ever reaches rural communities.”

Only 3 percent of revenue actually reaches the rural communities where hunting occurs
As a portion of any national economy, trophy hunting revenue never accounts for more than 0.27 percent of the GDP. Additionally, trophy hunting revenues account for only 1.8 percent of overall tourism in nine investigated countries that allow trophy hunting, and even pro-hunting sources find that only 3 percent of the money actually reaches the rural communities where hunting occurs. While trophy hunting supporters routinely claim that hunting generates $200 million annually in remote areas of Africa, the industry is actually economically insignificant and makes a minimal contribution to national income. Click here to read the report.

Non-consumptive nature tourism
“Local African communities are key stakeholders for conservation, and they need real incentives for conservation,” said Jeff Flocken, North American regional director, International Fund for Animal Welfare. “Non-consumptive nature tourism-like wildlife viewing and photo safaris-is a much greater contributor than trophy hunting to both conservation and the economy in Africa. If trophy hunting and other threats continue depleting Africa’s wildlife, then Africa’s wildlife tourism will disappear. That is the real economic threat to the countries of Africa.”

Lions suffering from trophy hunting
Many species suffer at the hands of trophy hunters including the African lion. The number of African lions has declined by more than 50 percent in the past three decades, with just 32,000 believed remaining today. The steepest declines in lion population numbers occur in African countries with the highest hunting intensity, illustrating the unsustainability of the practice.

“Trophy hunting is driving the African lion closer to extinction,” said Teresa Telecky, director, wildlife department, Humane Society International. “More than 560 wild lions are killed every year in Africa by international trophy hunters. An overwhelming 62 percent of trophies from these kills are imported into the United States. We must do all we can to put an end to this threat to the king of beasts.”

Listing the African lion as endangered under the ESA would generally prohibit the import of and commercial trade in lion parts, and thus would likely considerably reduce the number of lions taken by Americans each year.

“The U.S. government has a serious responsibility to act promptly and try to prevent American hunters from killing wild lions, especially when the latest evidence shows that hunting is not economically beneficial. Listing the African lion under the Endangered Species Act will help lions at almost no cost to African communities. Government inaction could doom an already imperilled species to extinction through much of its range,” said Adam Roberts, executive vice president, Born Free USA.

A copy of the economic study is available for download. For more information about African lions, please visit www.helpafricanlions.org.

Source: http://www.wildlifeextra.com/go/news/trophy-hunting-sale.html#cr

About these ads

5 thoughts on “Trophy hunting almost worthless according to a new report

  1. Pingback: Առյուծի համաշխարհային օր. Օգնության մռնչյուն / World Lion Day. Roar for Help | Arlen Shahverdyan. Author's Blog

  2. Pingback: An Homage to the King of Beasts: World Lion Day

  3. Pingback: Welcome | END Trophy Hunting NOW

  4. Hi there! This post couldn’t be written any better! Going through this post reminds me of my previous roommate!
    He constantly kept talking about this. I will send this information to him.
    Fairly certain he will have a great read. Many thanks for
    sharing!

    Like

  5. The group of animal rights activists, led by HSUS and Born Free USA, that paid to have this report done have little credibility when it comes to facts and science. HSUS is against hunting for any reason. This is not a “study” with all of the implications of science and peer review. It is a report that HSUS and their friends paid to have manufactured. It directly contradicts the work of Dr. Peter Lindsey from Zimbabwe.

    Animal rights advocates dismiss the conservation benefits of hunting. However, a scientific study of trophy hunting by the University of Zimbabwe supports claims of conservation success tied to responsible hunting practices. Peter Lindsey, the lead author of the study, wrote, “trophy hunting is sustainable and low risk if well managed.” Lindsey continued, “Trophy hunting was banned in Kenya in 1977, in Tanzania during 1973–1978, and in Zambia from 2000 through 2003. Each of these bans resulted in an accelerated loss of wildlife due to the removal of incentives for conservation. Avoiding future bans is thus vital for conservation.” When local communities are not incentivized to protect wildlife they are subsequently killed.

    The manufactured report is not the only thing HSUS has been paying for:

    The Humane Society of the United States (HSUS), along with their co-defendants (including Born Free USA), have paid Feld Entertainment, Inc., $15.75 million to settle cases stemming from a lawsuit they brought against Feld over the care of its Asian elephants. This historic settlement payment to Feld Entertainment ends nearly 14 years of litigation between the parties.

    The HSUS group and several current and former attorneys of that firm, paid the settlement for their involvement in the case brought under the Endangered Species Act (ESA) that the U.S. District Court ruled was “frivolous,” “vexatious,” and “groundless and unreasonable from its inception.” Today’s settlement also covers the related Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act (RICO) case that Feld Entertainment filed against the groups after discovering they had paid a plaintiff for his participation in the original lawsuit and then attempted to conceal those payments.

    In the original ESA lawsuit, Feld Entertainment discovered the animal rights groups and their lawyers had paid over $190,000 to a former circus employee, Tom Rider, to be a “paid plaintiff.” The Court also found that the animal rights groups and their attorneys “sought to conceal the nature, extent and purpose of the payments” during the litigation. Their abuse of the judicial system included the issuance of a false statement under oath by Rider, assisted by his counsel, who the Court found was “the same attorney who was paying him” to participate in the litigation.

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s