tag:theconversation.com,2011:/ca/topics/canned-hunting-18664/articlesCanned hunting – The Conversation2023-10-04T13:43:24Ztag:theconversation.com,2011:article/2145072023-10-04T13:43:24Z2023-10-04T13:43:24ZLion protection fee paid by tourists could help stop trophy hunting – South African study<p>Trophy hunting is contentious. It typically involves paying for and pursuing a specific wild animal, often a large or iconic species, with the goal of killing it to obtain a trophy, such as the animal’s head, horns, or hide. </p>
<p>Popular public opinion is <a href="https://www.hsi.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/eu-trophy-hunting-poll.pdf">largely</a> in <a href="https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2022.1061295/full">favour</a> of <a href="https://www.worldanimalprotection.org/press-release/new-trophy-hunting-research-puts-south-africas-tourism-industry-in-peril">ending</a> the killing of wild animals for sport. However, the topic is hotly debated by policymakers and academics because of the potential financial <a href="https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/epdf/10.1111/conl.12877?src=getftr">incentives</a> it can provide to local communities and landowners to support conservation efforts.</p>
<p>Against this backdrop, we <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2351989423002913">set out</a> to test whether visitors to South Africa would be willing to pay a “lion protection fee” at border entry points. Our idea was that this could compensate for any lost revenue from trophy hunting were it to be banned. </p>
<p>We chose lions because they have wide appeal and are one of the most readily recognised trophy hunted animals.</p>
<p>We spoke to 907 people who were visiting, or planned to visit, the country. We <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2351989423002913">found</a> that a high percentage – over 80% – were in favour of the idea of a lion protection fee. And we calculated, on the basis of two scenarios, that the amount they were willing to pay could generate enough funds to equal, if not exceed, those currently generated by trophy hunting in South Africa. </p>
<p>Our findings come at an important time. South Africa is opening a public policy <a href="https://www.gov.za/speeches/minister-barbara-creecy-invites-comments-draft-policy-position-conservation-and-sustainable">consultation</a> on how the country can adopt a more sustainable and ethically driven approach to wildlife conservation.</p>
<h2>A complex debate</h2>
<p>The competitive nature of trophy hunting, in particular, has raised serious animal welfare concerns. Animals may experience huge stress as they’re pursued for days and separated from their family groups. Some hunting outfits use methods which may inflict prolonged and undue animal suffering.</p>
<p>From a conservation perspective, some advocate for trophy hunting because, for example, income generated may help mitigate human-wildlife conflicts, support anti-poaching efforts, and prevent land containing wildlife from being converted to other uses. They believe that <a href="https://www.conservationfrontlines.org/2019/10/trophy-hunting-bans-imperil-biodiversity/">banning</a> it could negatively affect conservation and community livelihoods. </p>
<p>Others, however, argue that trophy hunting could negatively affect conservation. For instance the specific targeting of certain animals – like males – could have a <a href="https://trophiccascades.forestry.oregonstate.edu/sites/trophic/files/Ripple_TREE_2016.pdf">harmful</a> effect on species population dynamics and social structures. Questions have also been <a href="https://digitalmallblobstorage.blob.core.windows.net/wp-content/2022/03/Trophy-Hunting-Working-paper.pdf">raised</a> as to whether funds from trophy hunting always reach local communities or those on the frontlines of conservation.</p>
<p>Ultimately, these discussions come down to a single issue: popular public opinion is <a href="https://www.worldanimalprotection.org/press-release/new-trophy-hunting-research-puts-south-africas-tourism-industry-in-peril">against</a> trophy hunting, but how could the financial revenue that it generates be replaced?</p>
<h2>Lion protection fee</h2>
<p>We surveyed people who had previously visited South Africa, or who would consider visiting in the future. We drew respondents from overseas countries and from the African continent.</p>
<p>Respondents were shown a statement saying that a total ban on trophy hunting in South Africa would help protect lions by preventing them from being hunted and killed as trophies. And that such a ban could be funded by introducing a “lion protection fee”, added to the visas of incoming tourists. </p>
<p>They were then asked questions to gauge what daily fee would be acceptable and how likely they would be to visit South Africa under different daily fee scenarios.</p>
<p>Of 907 respondents, 84.2% stated that being charged a “lion protection fee” was a “great” or a “good” idea. A minority (7.5%) had a negative view. Only two respondents (0.2%) indicated a pro-trophy hunting attitude.</p>
<p>We used this survey to create initial estimates of the maximum price ranges tourists would be willing to pay. </p>
<p>There were two main fee scenarios.</p>
<p>In the first scenario, overseas visitors would pay between US$6 and US$7 for every day they’re in the country for a maximum of six days. Southern African tourists would pay between US$3 and US$4. We worked on tourist numbers which we sourced from <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2351989423002913?ref=cra_js_challenge&fr=RR-1#tbl0020">Statistics South Africa</a>. Our calculations were based on around 2.6 million overseas visitors and 12.3 million southern African tourists.</p>
<p>In the second scenario, fees would be collected as a one-off departure tax of US$6 for all foreign visitors leaving by land or sea, and US$33 for air passengers. Once again, we used tourist numbers from the <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2351989423002913?ref=cra_js_challenge&fr=RR-1#tbl0020">Statistics South Africa</a>. Our calculations were based on around 10.5 million foreign visitors leaving by land, 70,000 leaving by sea, and 3.4 million flying out.</p>
<p>Our calculations show that in both scenarios enough funds could be generated to at least equal, but potentially exceed, the US$176.1 million currently generated by trophy hunting of all the iconic species in South Africa a year. These calculations are based on numbers of visitors from different traveller categories multiplied by the median number of days those traveller-types stay.</p>
<p>Based on the number of respondents who said they would rather not visit because of the fees, we calculated that there would be a 15% decrease in the number of tourists willing to visit South Africa. But we argue that these decreases could be partially compensated for by increased visits from travellers previously deterred by trophy hunting – <a href="https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2351989423002913#bibliog0005">13%</a> of those who did not wish to travel to South Africa cited trophy hunting as a reason.</p>
<p>A 2021 <a href="https://www.hsi.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/eu-trophy-hunting-poll.pdf">survey</a> of European Union citizens backs up our findings. It showed that 84% of 10,687 respondents were either somewhat or strongly opposed to “the trophy hunting of wild animals found in Africa”.</p>
<h2>Replacing trophy hunting revenue</h2>
<p>Our findings could pave the way for a responsible transition away from trophy hunting without unintended repercussions for wildlife and the communities that rely on them. </p>
<p>The practical implementation would need diligent deliberation. For example, administrative logistics and sensitivity to fluctuations in visitor numbers must be taken into account.</p>
<p>In addition, while the idea of channelling these funds towards landowners and communities for wildlife conservation holds promise, there are concerns about public trust in institutions. Such funds must be carefully managed. </p>
<p>The types of tourism taxes we propose are not new. Twenty-two countries around the world currently <a href="https://blog.wego.com/tourist-tax/">charge</a> a tax on tourists to preserve their natural and cultural heritage. </p>
<p>This is a pivotal <a href="https://www.gov.za/speeches/minister-barbara-creecy-invites-comments-draft-policy-position-conservation-and-sustainable">moment</a> for the future of South Africa’s biodiversity and ethical wildlife tourism. The question now is whether the country seizes this opportunity to redefine its approach to conservation and chart a new course towards a more sustainable and compassionate future.</p>
<p><em>The authors extend their thanks to Dr Tom Moorhouse for his collaboration on this research and informative insights on this article.</em></p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/214507/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Neil D’Cruze works for an international NGO, World Animal Protection as the Global Head of Wildlife Research.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Angie Elwin works for an international NGO, World Animal Protection as a Wildlife Research Manager.</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Herbert Ntuli did not receive funding to work on this article. </span></em></p>Lion protection fees paid by tourists could pave the way for a responsible transition away from trophy hunting without affecting the communities that rely on hunting revenue.Neil D’Cruze, Global Head of Wildlife Research, World Animal Protection, and Visiting Researcher, Wildlife Conservation Research Unit (WildCRU), University of OxfordAngie Elwin, Wildlife Research Manager at World Animal Protection and Visiting Research Fellow, Manchester Metropolitan UniversityHerbert Ntuli, Senior Lecturer, University of PretoriaLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/1018422018-08-21T13:46:29Z2018-08-21T13:46:29ZSouth Africa’s role in the trade in lion bones: a neglected story<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/232786/original/file-20180820-30593-gq31sy.JPG?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Most lion bones in South Africa come from captive-bred lions.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Author supplied</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Africa’s wild lion population is <a href="http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/15951/0">estimated</a> to be between 20 000 and 30 000. <a href="http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/15951/0">Researchers</a> have good reason to believe that the real number is closer to 20 000. This puts lions in the <a href="http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/15951/0">“vulnerable”</a> category of threatened species. </p>
<p>The categorisation masks important realities. The only growing populations are those in fenced reserves with small wild managed populations. This is not only a species crisis. It’s also an ecological and economic crisis. Lions are apex predators, which means that entire food chains and ecological systems depend on healthy populations. Lions are also a significant tourism drawcard, and tourism is a significant employer. </p>
<p>South Africa, uniquely, also allows the breeding of lions in captivity, most of which have no conservation value. It has an <a href="https://www.bornfree.org.uk/storage/media/content/files/Publications/Born_Free_Lion_Breeding_Report.pdf">estimated</a> 7000 to 8000 lions in captivity across roughly 300 facilities. These lions are predominantly bred for canned hunting and the Asian predator bone market. </p>
<p>But, following a <a href="http://www.bloodlions.org">global campaign</a>, the demand for canned hunting has plummeted in the last few years. Environmental lobby groups <a href="http://emsfoundation.org.za/wp-content/uploads/THE-EXTINCTION-BUSINESS-South-Africas-lion-bone-trade.pdf">argue that</a> lions are now increasingly being killed for the bone trade. </p>
<p><a href="http://emsfoundation.org.za/wp-content/uploads/THE-EXTINCTION-BUSINESS-South-Africas-lion-bone-trade.pdf">A report prepared by</a> by EMS, an activist charity, and the lobby group Ban Animal Trading, shows that lion bones are sold on the black market as tiger bones. The bones are dropped into rice wine vats and sold as <a href="https://eia-international.org/tag/tiger-bone-wine">tiger bone wine</a> which is promoted in Asian markets as a treatment for rheumatism and impotence. The bones are also used to produce tiger bone cakes, an exotic small bar of melted bones mixed with additives like turtle shell. </p>
<p>The report argues that most lion bones <a href="http://emsfoundation.org.za/wp-content/uploads/THE-EXTINCTION-BUSINESS-South-Africas-lion-bone-trade.pdf">come from captive-bred lions</a> in South Africa. </p>
<p>Captive breeding is perfectly legal, if distasteful. But there are limits on the trade of lion bones. In 2016 the 17th <a href="https://theconversation.com/explainer-what-is-cites-and-why-should-we-care-65510">CITES</a> Conference of the Parties decided that no bone exports should be allowed from wild lions. But the conference also agreed that South Africa should establish a quota for skeleton exports from captive-bred lions. Captive breeding only occurs at scale in South Africa, so no other country is permitted to export lion bones.</p>
<p>A year later the Department of Environmental Affairs set an annual lion skeleton export quota at 800. It <a href="https://www.environment.gov.za/mediarelease/molewa_establishes_lionboneexportquota2018">raised this</a> to 1500 in July 2018. It did so without public consultation or the support of research. Even an <a href="https://conservationaction.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/2017_Interim-Report-1.pdf">interim report</a> prepared for the department by the <a href="https://www.sanbi.org/">South African National Biodiversity Institute</a> did not specify grounds on which to establish, or expand, a quota. </p>
<p>On top of this, there’s poor regulation of lion breeding facilities. The department doesn’t have a working database so doesn’t know how many facilities there are, or what the total number of captive-bred predators is.</p>
<h2>How it works</h2>
<p><a href="http://saiia.org.za/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/Harvey_180818_WorkingPaper_PredatorBreedingSA.pdf">In my new report,</a> I discuss how breeding facilities are linked to the trade in lion bones.</p>
<p>The facilities arrange hunts that cost in the region of <a href="http://www.tinashegroup.co.za/p15/hunting/hunting-packages-by-tinashe-outfitters.html">$22 000</a> for a male and female combination. Wildlife researcher, Karl Amman, <a href="http://www.karlammann.com/pdf/swara-tiger-rhino-piece.pdf">describes</a> how trophy taxidermists then sell the lion skeletons (without the skull) on to buyers. These are usually in Asian countries. A skeleton can fetch $1500. </p>
<p>The importer then sells the bones on for between $700 and $800 per kg. A 100kg lion yields about 18kgs of bone, worth roughly $15 000 at this point in the supply chain. The bones are then imported into Vietnam, boiled down in large pots to yield 100g <a href="https://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/com/ac/30/Inf/E-AC30-Inf-15x.pdf">bars of cake</a> which are sold for roughly $1000. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.bornfree.org.uk/storage/media/content/files/Publications/Born_Free_Lion_Breeding_Report.pdf">Conservationists</a> are concerned that South Africa’s quota provides an incentive to breed lions not only for the bullet, but also for the bone trade. </p>
<p>The 2017 quota was fully subscribed within weeks while a newly released report prepared for CITES <a href="https://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/com/ac/30/Inf/E-AC30-Inf-15x.pdf">suggests that</a> 3469 skeletons were exported that year, nearly double the allocated number. </p>
<p>This rise in the trade of lion bones shouldn’t come as a surprise. In 2016 the US <a href="https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/5808f6ffe4b099c434319294">banned the import</a> of captive-origin lion trophies from South Africa. Breeding facilities began looking for alternative markets. Selling lion carcasses was an obvious option given that a lioness skeleton fetches roughly R30 000, and a male skeleton about R50 000, when sold to a trader. </p>
<p>The predator breeding industry in South Africa <a href="http://www.sapredators.co.za/p37/faq/9-myths-about-captive-bred-lions.html">argues</a> that captive lion populations serve as a buffer against wild lion poaching because it can satisfy the demand for bones.</p>
<p>But those who oppose the trade in lion bones cite <a href="https://eia-international.org/evidence-cites-shows-irresponsible-lion-bone-trade-drives-consumer-demand-big-cat-parts">evidence</a> that suggests the opposite is true. If anything, the quota could fuel the demand for lion products and provide a laundering channel for illegally sourced wild lion parts. This may imperil already vulnerable wild lion populations elsewhere in Africa. It also makes law enforcement extremely challenging: officials cannot be expected to distinguish between legal and illegally sourced bone stock. </p>
<h2>What is being done about it?</h2>
<p>The <a href="https://www.iol.co.za/news/south-africa/new-report-reveals-flaws-in-lion-bone-export-quota-16149686">public outcry</a> over an apparently arbitrary quota has been notable. The backlash against canned hunting and the bone trade has been similarly vocal. </p>
<p>The arguments against the trade have been put on the table at a <a href="https://conservationaction.co.za/resources/reports/captive-lion-breeding-for-hunting-in-south-africa-harming-or-promoting-the-conservation-image-of-the-country/">two-day colloquium</a> in South Africa’s parliament. The question being asked is: does the captive lion breeding industry harm, or promote, South Africa’s conservation image?</p>
<p>Ultimately, it is parliament’s job to hold the government to account. The colloquium may go some way towards doing so. It may even end the brutality of captive predator breeding.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/101842/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Ross Harvey works for the South African Institute of International Affairs. The Institute has received funding from the Humane Society International (HSI) to carry out an independent study on the economics of the captive predator breeding industry in South Africa. </span></em></p>Captive breeding takes place in South Africa and no other country is permitted to export lion bones.Ross Harvey, Senior Researcher in Natural Resource Governance (Africa), South African Institute of International AffairsLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/991632018-07-29T08:28:46Z2018-07-29T08:28:46ZOutrage over Cecil the lion slaying three years ago left little in its wake<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/226001/original/file-20180703-116123-1azfe6c.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Cecil the Lion shortly before he was killed.</span> <span class="attribution"><a class="source" href="https://www.flickr.com/photos/vjosullivan/15932338845/">Vince O'Sullivan/Flickr</a></span></figcaption></figure><p>It’s just over three years since a lion was shot in Zimbabwe by Walter Palmer, a dentist from Minnesota in the US, in a drama that became known as “Cecilgate”. The lion’s death sparked heated debates around the world about <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/conl.12224">trophy hunting</a>. And the fallout <a href="https://repository.up.ac.za/bitstream/handle/2263/60680/Lindsey_Life_2016.pdf?sequence=1">was hailed</a> as a turning point for the wildlife tourism industry because trophy hunting was shown to be morally untenable for many people, particularly those living <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/mam.12096">in developed countries</a>. </p>
<p>The incident became a teachable moment. People were made aware of Africa’s wildlife conservation crises and the declining lion numbers – from over 200 000 a century ago to about <a href="https://www.panthera.org/cat/lion">20 000</a>. The issue of <a href="https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/african-studies-review/article/moving-targets-the-canned-hunting-of-captivebred-lions-in-south-africa/929CD0F7D4825D9DB6CD52DEEE1B9B27">canned hunting</a>, where wild animals are bred on farms to be shot by rich foreign trophy hunters, became a topic of contention. Poaching was highlighted as another huge problem. </p>
<p>To understand the full impact of the incident and its fallout <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/09669582.2018.1489399">I conducted research</a> looking at Cecil’s legacy – in other words what’s happened since he was shot. </p>
<p>I found that the outcry led to some policy changes in developed countries. For example, the UK <a href="http://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/CBP-7908/CBP-7908.pdf">demanded that African</a> countries improve their hunting practices as a condition for continued support while France <a href="https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/nov/19/france-bans-imports-of-lion-hunt-trophies">banned</a> lion trophy imports altogether. Companies also took action: a number of airlines, led by Virgin’s Sir Richard Branson, pledged not to carry hunting trophies <a href="https://www.virgin.com/richard-branson/big-game-worth-more-alive-dead">from Africa</a>. </p>
<p>But the Cecil movement didn’t lead to any deep-seated changes. The sad reality is that trophy hunting persists in many parts of Africa, as does the even more abhorrent practice of canned hunting. In the southern Africa region, Botswana is the exception. But its <a href="https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/03736245.2017.1299639">ban</a> on trophy hunting was imposed well before Cecilgate. Hunting companies are still thriving, offering a long list of <a href="https://wildafricahuntingsafaris.com/zimbabwe-trophy-price-list/">“safari specials.”</a>.</p>
<p>The Cecil movement has not resulted in any tangible contributions to wildlife conservation in Africa. Conservation remains under-funded, poaching is rife, and lion numbers are still <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/conl.12224">on the decline</a>. </p>
<p>There are a few reasons for this.</p>
<h2>Lack of understanding</h2>
<p>The Cecil movement showed a lack of understanding —- or disregard —- of the different perspectives in countries that are home to lions. </p>
<p>Professor David MacDonald, Director of the Wildlife Conservation Research Unit at Oxford University and his co-authors recently <a href="https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/mam.12096">pointed out that</a> there are very divergent views about lions in the wealthy West compared with communities that live in close proximity to them. They asked: </p>
<blockquote>
<p>Who has the right to make decisions about trophy hunting? How should the weight of opinions held on lion hunting in countries without lions, such as the US (which has a thriving domestic hunting market), be ranked against the opinions held in African countries where lions occur (and where the financial consequences of a cessation of trophy hunting might bite the hardest)?</p>
</blockquote>
<p>These divergent views played out in the weeks and months after Cecil’s death when it became apparent that there was simply no grassroots support for a hunting ban.</p>
<p>In response to the Western media frenzy around Cecilgate, Africans felt that the West cared more about animals than they did about people. This undermined the Cecil movement’s moral authority. It didn’t help that the lion was called Cecil – the name of one of Britain’s great imperialists, <a href="https://www.bbc.com/news/magazine-32131829">Cecil John Rhodes</a>. </p>
<p>Zimbabwean born Goodwell Nzou, then a PhD candidate at Wake Forest University, put this aptly in <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2015/08/05/opinion/in-zimbabwe-we-dont-cry-for-lions.html">the New York Times</a>.</p>
<blockquote>
<p>In Zimbabwe we don’t cry for lions. In my village, surrounded by wildlife conservation areas, no lion has ever been beloved or granted an affectionate nickname… We Zimbabweans are left shaking our heads, wondering why Americans care more about African animals than about African people…</p>
</blockquote>
<p>Crucially, the Cecil movement also failed to propose an economically viable alternative to trophy hunting. Suggested alternatives like photographic tourism has not generated enough revenue to match the USD$200 million that Africa receives from <a href="https://www.conservationaction.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/The-200-Million-Question-How-Much-Does-Trophy-Hunting-Really-Contribute-to-African-Communities.pdf">trophy hunting annually</a>.</p>
<p>In addition, hunters remain unrepentant about their sport. Walter Palmer himself still posts defiant <a href="https://twitter.com/DentistPalmer">tweets</a>:</p>
<blockquote>
<p>I just wanted to say I killed “a frican lion”.</p>
</blockquote>
<h2>Way forward</h2>
<p>Unless the West is prepared to devise a new funding model for conservation, calls to ban trophy hunting are futile. African governments need stronger support in finding alternative revenue streams. </p>
<p>Crucially, the people who live alongside wildlife must not be forgotten. The Cecil movement can strengthen its moral authority by demonstrating equal compassion for people who live in poverty. They might then have a chance of shifting attitudes and advancing their conservation cause. </p>
<p>With a new funding model, and grassroots support, the movement might one day be able to say that Cecil, as a symbol of all of Africa’s beautiful megafauna, didn’t die in vain. </p>
<p>As a final note, Xanda, one of Cecil’s cubs, was shot in 2017, and the incident went largely unnoticed. For now, nothing has changed.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/99163/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Muchazondida Mkono receives funding from The Australian Research Council. </span></em></p>The Cecil movement didn’t lead to any deep-seated changes as trophy hunting persists in many parts of Africa.Mucha Mkono, Research Fellow (Australian Research Council DECRA Fellow), Business School, The University of QueenslandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/666412016-10-06T20:14:15Z2016-10-06T20:14:15ZLions are better protected, but loopholes mean threats remain<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140760/original/image-20161006-32708-1c7rk2u.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The Parties to CITES (CoP17), rejected a proposal from nine African nations to upgrade the status of lions.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Stronger measures to protect lions in Africa from commercial trade failed to <a href="http://traveller24.news24.com/Explore/Green/shockwildlifetruths-lions-fail-to-get-uplisted-at-cites-cop17-20161003">pass</a> at the recent meeting of the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (<a href="https://cites.org/">CITES</a>) in Johannesburg.</p>
<p>CITES is a treaty between 183 national governments, known as the Parties, to control international trade in live wildlife and their parts. In a vote to up-list the lion from Appendix II to Appendix I – the highest category covering species threatened with extinction, in which trade is permitted only in exceptional circumstances – the Parties to CITES (CoP17) rejected a proposal from nine African nations to upgrade the status of lions.</p>
<p>At first glance, the decision is alarming and disappointing. The lion has undergone widespread decline in Africa, mainly from habitat loss, illegal trade in bush meat and retaliatory killing by people protecting their <a href="http://letlionslive.org/LionReport.pdf">livestock</a>. Although the species is not in immediate danger of extinction and trade is not the primary driver of declines, upgrading some lion populations to Appendix I was warranted.</p>
<p>Sadly, all indications are that lions will continue to decline in a significant proportion of their <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283293215_Lion_Panthera_leo_populations_are_declining_rapidly_across_Africa_except_in_intensively_managed_areas">range</a>, and increasing demand for their parts will likely fuel those declines. But had the parties voted “yes”, would it have helped?</p>
<h2>Trophy hunting and the bone trade</h2>
<p>Strengthening the ban would not have eliminated one of the main targets of up-listing proponents, the trade in lion trophies from sport hunting. Legal trade in hunting trophies is readily accommodated by CITES, regardless of the Appendix on which a species is listed. For example, the <a href="https://cites.org/eng/gallery/species/mammal/cheetah.html">cheetah</a> and <a href="https://cites.org/eng/gallery/species/mammal/leopard.html">leopard</a> are both included on Appendix I, yet exports of trophies are permitted by a number of countries. </p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140763/original/image-20161006-32734-y00ih2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140763/original/image-20161006-32734-y00ih2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/140763/original/image-20161006-32734-y00ih2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140763/original/image-20161006-32734-y00ih2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140763/original/image-20161006-32734-y00ih2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=400&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140763/original/image-20161006-32734-y00ih2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140763/original/image-20161006-32734-y00ih2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/140763/original/image-20161006-32734-y00ih2.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=503&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">A lion skull. Full skeletons are legally sold, aside from the skull which the hunter normally keeps.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Nor would an Appendix I listing preclude trade in captive-born lions or their parts. So an upgrade would not necessarily have affected South Africa’s ongoing trade of lion bones scavenged from canned hunts of captive-bred lions. Full skeletons – minus the skull, which the hunter usually keeps – are legally <a href="http://www.traffic.org/species-reports/traffic_species_mammals83.pdf">sold</a> to Lao People’s Democratic Republic, China and other Asian nations that value big cat parts for “medicinal” uses. This takes place despite the complete absence of evidence demonstrating any therapeutic value.</p>
<h2>One step forwards, two backwards?</h2>
<p>This is not to say that CITES was unable to address some serious issues that affect lion conservation. CoP17 <a href="https://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/cop/17/Com_I/E-CoP17-Com-I-29.pdf">adopted a new resolution</a> to ban all trade in wild lion parts; specifically bones, bone pieces, bone products, claws, skeletons, skulls and teeth removed from the wild and traded for commercial purposes. This is welcome news.</p>
<p>Unfortunately though, the loophole that perpetuates South Africa’s lion farming industry has been left open. As seen from failed <a href="http://www.nber.org/papers/w22314">experiments</a> allowing legal ivory sales, legalised trade may fuel demand and creates pathways to sell the products from illegally killed wildlife. </p>
<p>The legal trade in bones from captive-bred lions perpetuates the demand for big cat parts - not only of lions but also of leopards, jaguars and highly endangered tigers. These bones are largely indistinguishable except to experts. Deciding what is lion or tiger, and legal versus illegal, presents a formidable challenge for local authorities in Africa and Asia.</p>
<p>The Parties to CITES should be congratulated for recognising that trade in wild lions needs to be addressed. But I fear that, in failing to take on the captive bone trade, their efforts will be undermined. As long as South Africa continues to trade in body parts from farmed lions, an escalation in wild African cats being killed for the same markets in Asia is inevitable.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/66641/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Luke Hunter does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>A stronger ban on lion trade by CITES would have helped to lessen some of the threats lions face but it would have not have protected the animals from sport hunting.Luke Hunter, President and Chief Conservation Officer of Panthera, Research Associate, University of KwaZulu-NatalLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/615312016-07-08T04:42:37Z2016-07-08T04:42:37ZLion hunting only makes sense if it’s part of a package of interventions<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/129168/original/image-20160704-19094-18oodho.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">The death of Cecil the lion helped shed light on broader issues in the lion hunting world.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Cecil the lion’s <a href="http://www.cbsnews.com/pictures/cecil-the-lion-killed-by-hunter/">death</a> just outside Zimbabwe’s Hwange National Park put a recognisable face on the difficult problem of setting policy for lion hunting. Conservation biologists and wildlife managers have been grappling with the issue across sub-Saharan Africa. But there is no one simple answer.</p>
<p>Trophy hunting can be used to generate revenue and promote the protection of ecosystems. These might otherwise be converted to agriculture, accelerating the continent’s rapid loss of wildlife for reasons that include habitat conversion and fragmentation. </p>
<p>On the other hand, lions are both rare and highly coveted by hunters. Field studies consistently show that lion numbers in <a href="http://journals.cambridge.org/action/displayAbstract?fromPage=online&aid=9286929&fileId=S0030605312001457">Zimbabwe</a>, <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320714003875">Zambia</a>, <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2010.01576.x/full">Tanzania</a>, <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320711003661">Cameroon</a> and Mozambique have declined with over-harvesting – which is excessive numbers lost due to trophy hunting. This has occurred despite <a href="http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v428/n6979/abs/nature02395.html">scientific guidelines</a> to promote sustainability.</p>
<p>Lions, and their habitat, have <a href="http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10531-012-0381-4">declined by 70%</a> over recent decades. This is due to a combination of habitat loss and fragmentation, decline of prey numbers, snaring, human conflict, retaliatory killing and excessive legal hunting. Most nations have a network of protected areas, including national parks that do not allow hunting and game reserves or game management areas that do.</p>
<p>Given that the status quo is not working, what can be done to save the king of beasts? That is the question our <a href="https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Scott_Creel">recent study</a> involving scientists and managers at the Zambian Carnivore Programme, Montana State University and the Zambian Department of National Parks and Wildlife attempted to answer.</p>
<h2>The gap between theory and practice</h2>
<p>The current strategy for sustainable hunting of lions is known as age-restricted harvesting. This is where only male lions above a certain age, typically six years, can legally be shot. </p>
<p>In theory, such a system can be sustainable. This is because old males form a small part of most lion populations and these old males have often been ejected from prides by younger and stronger males. In practice, there are problems with identifying a male’s age just by looking at him. There are also challenges enforcing age-based rules. </p>
<p>A more fundamental problem is that existing guidelines were based on patterns in a very well-protected, growing lion population in <a href="http://www.tanzaniaparks.com/serengeti.html">Tanzania’s Serengeti National Park</a>. Most other lion populations face tougher conditions. </p>
<p>Our study aimed to determine whether lion hunting can be made sustainable for populations facing more typical challenges, including low prey numbers and the risk of being snared. These challenges are almost universal at this point for large lion populations in major ecosystems. Small lion populations in fenced areas tend to face fewer problems, but these populations are all small.</p>
<figure class="align-center zoomable">
<a href="https://images.theconversation.com/files/129170/original/image-20160704-19118-1gh6vyw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip"><img alt="" src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/129170/original/image-20160704-19118-1gh6vyw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&fit=clip" srcset="https://images.theconversation.com/files/129170/original/image-20160704-19118-1gh6vyw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=600&h=405&fit=crop&dpr=1 600w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/129170/original/image-20160704-19118-1gh6vyw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=600&h=405&fit=crop&dpr=2 1200w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/129170/original/image-20160704-19118-1gh6vyw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=600&h=405&fit=crop&dpr=3 1800w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/129170/original/image-20160704-19118-1gh6vyw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=754&h=509&fit=crop&dpr=1 754w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/129170/original/image-20160704-19118-1gh6vyw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=30&auto=format&w=754&h=509&fit=crop&dpr=2 1508w, https://images.theconversation.com/files/129170/original/image-20160704-19118-1gh6vyw.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=15&auto=format&w=754&h=509&fit=crop&dpr=3 2262w" sizes="(min-width: 1466px) 754px, (max-width: 599px) 100vw, (min-width: 600px) 600px, 237px"></a>
<figcaption>
<span class="caption">The current
system of hunting has many gaps in it, which has seen lion numbers drop.</span>
<span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span>
</figcaption>
</figure>
<h2>Gaps in the system</h2>
<p>We projected population dynamics for African lions 25 years into the future, both without hunting and under a range of hunting scenarios. We used mathematical models that were based on seven years of data from lions in the Luangwa Valley, home to Zambia’s crown jewel, the <a href="http://www.zambiatourism.com/destinations/national-parks/south-luangwa-national-park">South Luangwa National Park</a>.</p>
<p>The scenarios we considered included maximum quotas for hunting blocks, age restriction, hunting periods punctuated by recovery periods with no hunting, and combinations of these strategies. Our analysis is based on hunting blocks located adjacent to a fully protected national park. This is often the case in the real world, with lions moving regularly between protected and hunted landscapes. </p>
<p>Many people might consider the death of Cecil a few meters from a national park boundary to be an anomaly, but our analysis found that lions were typically shot less than a kilometre from the park boundary. This is well within the normal range of movements of lions living in the park.</p>
<p>We confirmed that age restriction is helpful, but most hunting scenarios resulted in a long-term decline in trophy-aged males. This is both detrimental to lion populations and undesirable for hunters if they are concerned with sustainability. The best strategy requires a combination of tactics. </p>
<p>The analysis showed that a decrease in the availability of prime-aged males is minimised by the combination of a block quota of one, a three-on/three-off cycle of hunting and recovery, and a minimum hunted age of seven or eight years. In other words, hunting blocks can sustainably be allocated one trophy hunt per year. That is about one lion per 2,000km² of at least seven years old, for three consecutive years, followed by three years for recovery. </p>
<p>It is also clear that trophy fees must be increased to account for the reduced quota if hunting is to effectively yield protection of public land. Such an increase could perhaps be paired with paying some portion of the fee only if a lion is shot, rather than paying proactively. This would reduce the incentive to shoot a lion, any lion.</p>
<h2>Broader problems</h2>
<p>Unfortunately, even this scenario is likely to allow a long-term lion decline if the problems of poaching or habitat degradation worsen. Trophy hunting by itself might be sustainable, but not when added to a background of poaching, habitat loss and retaliatory killing.</p>
<p>If it does not effectively contribute to controlling the problems of prey depletion and lion snaring in areas that allow hunting, trophy hunting at any level will not be sustainable. Lion hunting cannot continue to rely on drawing lions out of adjacent, fully protected national parks at unsustainable rates, as it recently has. </p>
<p>Such a situation is part of the problem, not the solution. With serious reforms to employ a combination of quotas, age restriction and recovery periods, perhaps this slow motion extinction can be reversed. Future generations will judge us harshly if we stand by and let the last lion leave this world.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/61531/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Scott Creel receives funding from the US National Science Foundation and the National Geographic Society. He is a Professor in the Department of Ecology at Montana State University and a Research Scientist with the Zambian Carnivore Programme.</span></em></p>New research from Zambia’s Luangwa Valley identifies reforms needed for lion trophy hunting.Scott Creel, Professor, Montana State UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/447932015-08-07T04:40:23Z2015-08-07T04:40:23ZWhy a ban on hunting in Botswana isn’t the answer to challenges facing the country<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/91073/original/image-20150806-5209-1r31990.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Banning hunting can have negative impacts on the conservation of animals.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Siphiwe Sibeko/Reuters</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>When Botswana’s government announced a <a href="http://www.bdlive.co.za/africa/africannews/2013/08/27/outcry-over-ban-on-hunting-in-botswanas-parks">ban</a> on hunting about two years ago, the news was welcomed by anti-hunting organisations. </p>
<p>But communities, hunting operators and game farmers were not happy at all. Hunting, and especially trophy hunting, generates millions - particularly in rural areas where there are high levels of unemployment and <a href="http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTAFRSUMAFTPS/Resources/2049902-1327506860777/FinalSSATourismRpt1118.pdf">poverty</a>. </p>
<h2>Where the money goes</h2>
<p>It is also important to understand where and how hunters spend money when they take a hunting trip. Firstly, there’s transport: travel costs, including flights and moving to the location. Then they need accommodation, food and drinks. Finally, it costs money to book the species they are hunting, the professional hunters who ensure permits are obtained, trackers, skinners and taxidermists. </p>
<p>Aside from employment opportunities, communities also <a href="http://conservationmagazine.org/2014/01/can-trophy-hunting-reconciled-conservation/">benefit</a>. In most cases the carcasses are donated or sold at a cheap rate to communities, since the trophy hunters cannot transport the meat so only take the <a href="http://abcnews.go.com/US/cecil-lion-trophy-hunting-industry-africa-explained/story?id=32785057">horns and skin</a>. These hunters are big spenders, investing on average more than US$10 000 per trip, which is considerably higher than the average spending by any other type of tourist. </p>
<p>The ban therefore implies a loss in taxes, foreign exchange and jobs. But Botswana’s story does not end here.</p>
<h2>Poverty persists</h2>
<p>Another major threat facing wildlife in Botswana is an increase in <a href="http://www.loc.gov/law/help/wildlife-poaching/botswana.php">poaching</a>. Media reports, specifically referring to elephants, as well as personal contacts, confirm that they are experiencing a <a href="http://www.botswana.co.za/Echoes_of_Eden-travel/ivory-trade.html">rise</a> in incidents. Poaching is fuelled by two sources, <a href="http://africanindaba.com/2014/04/poaching-in-africa-facts-causes-and-solutions-april-2014-volume-12-3/">poverty and greed</a>. </p>
<p>This applies for communities and hunting operators alike. A very good example is the killing of Cecil the lion, which was shot in Zimbabwe for approximately <a href="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/zimbabwe/11771011/What-we-know-about-Walter-Palmer-Cecil-the-lions-killer.html">US$50 000</a>. The higher the levels of poverty the more one is going to see this happening and a total ban will not alleviate the problem. </p>
<p>The latest report on species numbers in southern Africa shows that South Africa and Namibia are two of the few countries where wildlife is on the <a href="http://www.iol.co.za/scitech/science/environment/hunting-for-a-way-to-save-wildlife-1.1697440#.VcM7b_mqqko">increase</a>. The rest of the countries are all experiencing high levels of poaching and a decrease in the number of wild animals. </p>
<p>This implies that from a conservation point of view wildlife is not doing well and one of the reasons for this is because hunting creates huge value. People protect what is valuable to them. And if hunting helps them get money and other goods from the animal, it is certainly in their best interests to look after the animals. </p>
<p>Anti-hunting organisations believe that photographic safaris are a natural and better replacement. The reality is that it is not easy to replace hunters with photographic tourists since they:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>On average they spend less than hunters. </p></li>
<li><p>Photographic safaris can be done almost anywhere in the world and they are not limited to game farms or concession areas where hunting is limited to specific destination or areas.</p></li>
<li><p>Finally, you do not require as many skills to do photographic safaris compared with hunting safaris.</p></li>
</ul>
<p>From a South African perspective, the ban in Botswana could lead to an increase in hunting <a href="http://www.nwu.ac.za/content/nwu-expert-says-botswana%E2%80%99s-ban-hunting-can-impact-south-africa-potchefstroom-campus-news-201">demand</a>. South Africa and other African countries that allow hunting will benefit from the ban since those who hunt legally will seek another <a href="http://www.usnews.com/news/world/articles/2015/07/30/for-some-hunting-lions-in-africa-is-the-ultimate-experience">destination</a>.</p>
<p>In addition, Botswana is experiencing problems with high numbers of specific species such as elephants that are causing serious damage to the <a href="http://earthobservatory.nasa.gov/IOTD/view.php?id=1708">environment</a>. This raises the question: who really benefits here and what good can come out of it? </p>
<p>Kenya is a good example of where a hunting ban <a href="http://mobile.nation.co.ke/lifestyle/Hunting-ban-fails-to-end-bloodbath/-/1950774/1968130/-/format/xhtml/item/1/-/whyu6g/-/index.html">failed</a>. In the 1970s Kenya banned elephant hunting as their numbers had dwindled. This did not make a difference as wealthy and politically connected people were major players in the ivory trade game. The ban did not apply to them. The ivory was in such high demand that officials needed a small bribe and were able to hunt ivory. Three times the number of elephants were <a href="http://www.rexano.org/ConservationPages/Kenya_Frame.htm">hunted</a> after the ban was put in place.</p>
<p>A hunting ban is not the answer to solve the issues raised by both the anti-hunting proponents and the conservationists. There are many examples in South Africa that prove that a well managed hunting operation generates economic benefits for the broader community, creates jobs and contributes significantly to conservation. </p>
<p>It is better to exclude specific species that are endangered from the hunting list. South Africa has done this successfully in the past and it is currently being done with rhino. Issuing limited permits for species under threat, as is currently done for leopard, is a better option. The answer clearly lies in the effective management of our resources.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/44793/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Melville Saayman receives funding from National Research Foundation.</span></em></p>Botswanan communities, hunting operators and game farmers reacted badly to the country’s hunting ban. This is because it generates income, particularly in poor rural areas.Melville Saayman, Professor of Tourism Management and Economics, North-West UniversityLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/454642015-08-06T04:33:46Z2015-08-06T04:33:46Z‘Blood lions’ sheds a harsh light on the canned hunting industry<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/90441/original/image-20150731-17158-3s7t43.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">Canned lion hunting is the focus of the 2015 film 'Blood Lions', which calls for the end of being 'bred for the bullet'.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Shutterstock</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Since the first public documentation in 2004, <a href="http://www.cannedlion.org/faqs.html">canned lion hunting</a> has, in recent times, become more controversial and the film <a href="http://www.bloodlions.org/"><em>Blood Lions</em></a> further stimulates that debate. </p>
<p><em>Blood Lions</em> is a sensationalised yet comprehensive true story of the canned lion hunting industry in <a href="https://www.environment.gov.za/">South Africa</a>. By definition, the term “canned hunting” is not considered as <a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/hunt">hunting</a>, which is defined as the “chase or search for something (game, wild animals) for the purpose of catching or killing.” Another definition is “the act of conducting a search for something”. By all definitions hunting involves a search. There is none involved in canned hunting. <a href="http://www.bloodlions.org/phasa-president-calls-for-a-review-of-lion-hunting/">Sport hunters</a> of free-roaming animals have condemned the activity of canned hunting as slander. </p>
<p><em>Blood Lions</em> not only clearly demonstrates that canned lion hunting is unjustifiable in terms of <a href="http://www.nspca.co.za/clientdata/10072/uploads/pdfs/lions_in_captivity_hunting_sa.pdf">ethics</a> but also <a href="https://dlc.dlib.indiana.edu/dlc/bitstream/handle/10535/6027/the%20challenge.pdf?sequence=1">conservation</a>. The conditions under which the animals are kept are not reflective of their natural habitat nor do they conform to <a href="http://nagonline.net/761/zoo-guidelines-keeping-large-felids-captivity/">zoo</a> or <a href="http://www.capenature.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/Policy-on-Fencing-and-Enclosure-of-Game-February-2014-Draft.pdf">camp</a> standards of enclosure size or quality. And little is known about what happens to lions bred in captivity that are not suitable for hunting. </p>
<h2>Hunting for conservation?</h2>
<p>Canned lion hunters justify the practice by arguing that for every canned lion hunted a wild lion has been saved. <em>Blood Lions</em> reveals otherwise. The film also clarifies that canned hunting makes a limited contribution to the conservation of the species or genetics. </p>
<p>The revenue generated returns to the owner and is plugged back into the owner’s business. Operating costs include the cost of building and maintaining the camps as well as <a href="http://sapredators.co.za/">purchasing</a> and <a href="http://www.zutrition.com/lion-nutrition-guide/">feeding</a> the lions. Each lion can eat approximately <a href="http://www.researchgate.net/publication/200009861_Feeding_behaviour_of_lions_Panthera_leo_on_a_small_reserve">US$16,000</a> worth of meat per year in the wild. However, captive bred lions tend to be fed more to <a href="http://www.wildlifeauctions.co.za/services.php?act=download&cid=ODg=">fast-track growth</a>, which pushes the feeding cost higher. Setting up a lion camp depends on the fencing material used, the camp design, water provision, electrifying components and installation. </p>
<p><a href="https://www.environment.gov.za/sites/default/files/legislations/nemba_threatenedspecies_regulations_g29657rg8638gon152.pdf">Standard regulations</a> stipulate that four lions can be kept in a 2 000m² electrified camp. As confirmed in <em>Blood Lions</em> the cost of a lion can be quickly recouped by being put up for auction to a large market of enthused ‘hunters’ and the <a href="https://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/com/ac/27/E-AC27-24-03-03.pdf">lion bone trade</a>. Although the profitable returns from the hunt make the activity economically justifiable, this only applies to the owner. </p>
<p>The size of the land where the hunting takes place is small and often does not meet the requirements or standards of captive lion facilities. This means that canned lion hunting gives the land owner high returns on a small piece of land. </p>
<h2>More lions in captivity</h2>
<p>According to the International Union for Conservation of <a href="http://www.iucnredlist.org/details/15951/0">Nature</a> and Endangered Wildlife <a href="https://www.ewt.org.za/CCP/Captive%20Carnivores.pdf">Trust</a>, there are more lions in captivity in South Africa than in the wild - approximately 7 000 in captivity and 3 500 in the wild. </p>
<p>Captive raised lions are raised for <a href="http://www.lion-park.com/">petting</a> and handling by tourists and volunteers who desire a close encounter with charismatic wildlife. <em>Blood Lions</em> explains how this type of tourism feeds into canned hunting. </p>
<p>Hand-raised lions are notoriously difficult to rehabilitate into the wild - not only behaviourally but also because of limited available land in which to relocate them. Large predators such as lions require large expanses of free roaming land and ample food resources. Although <a href="http://www.panthera.org/sites/default/files/Reproductive%20biology%20of%20a%20pride%20of%20lions%20on%20Karongwe%20game%20reserve,%20Sout%20Africa.pdf">small reserves</a> can sustain lions, this requires management and financial resources. </p>
<p>Although the future of captive lions may seem bleak, there are opportunities to ‘rescue’ a handful. <a href="http://www.lionwhisperer.co.za/">Lion sanctuaries</a> have become a popular means of adopting captive bred lions. However, like those in captivity, the maintenance cost of these lions is high. On their own lion sanctuaries generate very little revenue or enough profit to be considered a sustainable option. </p>
<p>Furthermore, lion sanctuaries require intensive individual action to be driven forward and there is limited monetary incentive. Unless new <a href="http://www.researchgate.net/profile/Melanie_Orros/publication/222419381_Keeping_fit_on_the_ark_assessing_the_suitability_of_captive-bred_animals_for_release/links/0912f50acfc9041b90000000.pdf">release strategies</a> are developed, lion sanctuaries and release programs have limited sustainability. </p>
<h2>Profit verses ethics</h2>
<p>Canned hunting and sport hunting differ in their ethics, execution and overall contributions. Canned hunting primarily focuses on the return of investment and profit from the raising of the animal. Although canned hunting does create employment, trophy hunting contributes to conservation efforts as well.</p>
<p>Thinking outside the box towards alternative land uses and business endeavours has become a necessity. Everyone has equal rights to make a living - but at what cost? The revealing nature of <em>Blood Lions</em> gets the viewer thinking about the negative use of <a href="https://www.boundless.com/economics/textbooks/boundless-economics-textbook/natural-resource-economics-36/introduction-to-natural-resource-economics-136/types-of-natural-resources-536-12633/">natural resources</a>. </p>
<p>Although there is a legitimate push and drive to have it banned and abolished, history and human nature has proven that canned lion hunting is likely to continue – unwanted but too profitable to exclude as a business opportunity and as the fulfilment of an addiction.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/45464/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nkabeng Maruping-Mzileni does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>The film ‘Blood Lions’ is contributing to the debate over canned hunting by delving into a sensationalised yet comprehensive true story.Nkabeng Maruping-Mzileni, Lecturer in Wildlife Management and Nature Conservation, Tshwane University of TechnologyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/454452015-07-30T13:31:05Z2015-07-30T13:31:05ZThe debate over Cecil the lion should be about conservation, not hunting<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/90320/original/image-20150730-25773-gdng27.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">There are a number of potentially valuable lessons to be learned from Cecil the lion's death.</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">From www.shutterstock.com</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Much of the attention generated by the demise of <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jul/29/cecil-the-lion-calls-for-prosecution-us-dentist-walter-palmer">Cecil the lion</a> appears related to the fact that he was a member of a charismatic species, that his species is threatened and the nature of his death. But now that Cecil, a resident of Hwange National Park in Zimbabwe, is gone how do we ensure that such events are not repeated? It is not as simple as banning hunting.</p>
<p>Trophy hunting, or the selective removal of animals from a population based on a desirable trait, is a deeply polarising issue. Ethical standpoints against the deliberate killing of animals for sport are what drive the public response that we now see. </p>
<p>Biologists have concerns about undesirable evolutionary outcomes that may arise from the killing of “prime” individual <a href="http://www.pnas.org/content/106/Supplement_1/9987.abstract">animals</a>. These animals are typically males that exhibit a desirable trait, like a large mane. Conservationists, have concerns that hunting may cause inbreeding, or drive rare species’ populations in isolated protected areas to the brink of <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1469-1795.2011.00476.x/abstract">extinction</a>.</p>
<h2>Hunting brings in money</h2>
<p>Despite the controversy, trophy hunting remains a legally sanctioned activity in most African countries. That is because hunting generates income. Sportsmen and women visiting Africa contribute as much as USD 201 million a year directly through <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00594.x/abstract">hunting</a>. This is excluding economic multipliers. And safari operators are custodians of at least 1.4 million km2 of land in sub-Saharan Africa, exceeding the area encompassed by national parks in those countries where hunting is permitted by over <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00594.x/abstract">20%</a>.</p>
<p>Conservationists recognise that trophy hunting contributes to the protection of land, where ecotourism may be unviable. Bans on trophy hunting in Kenya (1977 onward), Tanzania (1973-78) and Zambia (2000-03) have been associated with an accelerated loss of wildlife, not the other way <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1523-1739.2006.00594.x/abstract">around</a>. </p>
<p>The halving of Africa’s lion population over the past 20 years is not the result of trophy hunting. African lions have declined through the classic drivers of extinction, namely habitat loss, human-wildlife conflict and <a href="http://www.defenders.org/african-lion/threats">disease</a>.</p>
<h2>What’s different about Cecil</h2>
<p>Cecil was no ordinary lion. Reportedly aged 13 years old, he was well past the normal breeding age for males of his species, what we term <a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/senescent">senescent</a>. Male lions only gain opportunities to mate after taking over pride ownership after at least five years of age. They may hold tenure for between two and four years before being displaced by younger males. Cecil should thus have completed the genetic contribution that he could be expected to make before he was shot, and could not have been expected to live much past <a href="http://www.nature.com/news/2004/040216/full/news040216-22.html">15 years</a>.</p>
<p>Why then had Cecil remained a breeding pride male for so long? One reason may be that the younger males that would have contested pride ownership, had been removed by hunters operating in lands neighbouring the Hwange National Park. Indeed, the Oxford University researchers who had been following Cecil’s life performance reported that 72% of the males they collared within the national park had been killed by trophy hunters, and 30% of those males shot were under four years <a href="http://www.researchgate.net/publication/223621516_The_impact_of_sport-hunting_on_the_population_dynamics_of_an_African_lion_population_in_a_protected_area">old</a>. </p>
<p>In this way, hunting taking place legitimately on land outside the formally protected area is prejudicing not only scientific research, but also the role of a flagship national park in protecting viable populations of large carnivores.</p>
<h2>How should this conflict be resolved?</h2>
<p>If the professional hunter and his client broke the law, then let the Zimbabwean legal system take care of that. More generally, how do conservationists trade off the money generated by trophy hunters against the huge costs of maintaining protected areas? What restrictions should be placed on where hunting takes place so that opportunities to draw candidates for hunting out of protected areas using baits placed outside their borders are prevented?</p>
<p>The traditional boundaries drawn on maps from parks and zones where these animals are need to be re-assessed. They need softening and buffer regions where hunting is not allowed. Alternatively, areas effectively protected within the park should have non-poaching activities that people can enjoy. Perhaps the activities in the buffer zone could be foot safaris, providing the excitement of encounters with wild animals without the destructive outcome associated with hunting. </p>
<p>The worldwide emotional response to the killing of this eminent animal could potentially lead to more effective reconciliation between the legitimate contributions that hunting can make to conservation, and the efforts to set aside sufficient land in protected areas to ensure the long-term persistence of the species these areas are supposed to protect. </p>
<p>Whatever the outcome following the death of Cecil, an emotive, uncompromising standpoint around the ethics of trophy hunting alone will not assist the conservation effort in Africa. In fact, it may well have the unintended consequence of undermining it.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/45445/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Norman Owen-Smith receives funding from South African National Research Foundation</span></em></p><p class="fine-print"><em><span>Lochran Traill does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Now that Cecil the Lion is gone, what lessons can be taken from the controversial manner of his death?Lochran Traill, Research Fellow, Centre for African Ecology , University of the WitwatersrandNorman Owen-Smith, Emeritus Research Professor of African Ecology, University of the WitwatersrandLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.tag:theconversation.com,2011:article/442692015-07-15T04:34:09Z2015-07-15T04:34:09ZHunting in Africa: to ban or not to ban is the question<figure><img src="https://images.theconversation.com/files/88327/original/image-20150714-21734-z11zg6.jpg?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=496&fit=clip" /><figcaption><span class="caption">US TV presenter Melissa Bachman takes advantage of canned hunting regulations in South Africa</span> <span class="attribution"><span class="source">Melissa Bachman/Instagram</span></span></figcaption></figure><p>Hunting has long been a highly controversial activity, whether as a sport (leisure or recreational), for commercial purposes or if done for cultural reasons. African countries that legalise hunting activities experience <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/may/20/the-idea-that-hunting-saves-african-wildlife-doesnt-withstand-scrutiny">scrutiny</a> around their conservation efforts, and how much money they make from it.</p>
<p>Trophy hunting, which is offered in 23 sub-Saharan African countries, generates an estimated <a href="http://siteresources.worldbank.org/INTAFRSUMAFTPS/Resources/2049902-1327506860777/FinalSSATourismRpt1118.pdf">US$201 million per year</a>. Out of the <a href="http://www.africanwildlifeconservationfund.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/Economic-and-conservation-significance.pdf">23</a> countries taking part in legal hunting activities, Tanzania, Mozambique, Namibia and South Africa have the most effective controls and the highest levels of transparency.</p>
<p>Countries such as Chad, Sudan, Congo, Mali, Senegal, Togo and Nigeria – to name a few – suffer from political <a href="http://www.wildlifeextra.com/resources/doc/misc/big_game_hunting.pdf">instability</a> that disrupts the ability to effectively implement control regimes on hunting. </p>
<p>The magnifying glass has been focused on hunting on the continent because of the kinds of animals hunted as well as the increase in illegal activities. Arguments around the viability of hunting are often related to the difficulty in regulating the numbers of animals hunted and transparency around what happens to the money generated. </p>
<p>As a consequence, debates spearheaded by the European Union in its <a href="http://capacity4dev.ec.europa.eu/b4life/document/eu-strategic-appraoch-african-wildlife-conservation-1-synthesis">strategic approach</a> to African Wildlife Conservation steer towards a highly restricted approach to hunting in Africa. </p>
<p>This policy was designed as a response to global concerns about the vulnerability of African wildlife. Changes in demographic and economic trends have lead to resources being used up more rapidly. This has included a rise in illegal hunting as well as <a href="http://capacity4dev.ec.europa.eu/b4life/document/eu-strategic-appraoch-african-wildlife-conservation-1-synthesis-draft-document">landscapes</a> being degraded. </p>
<h2>How hunting makes money</h2>
<p>The relevant government bodies issue hunting licences and <a href="http://www.shingelani.co.za/downloads/SA_Goverment_TOPS_Regulations_Revised_July_10.pdf">permits</a>. These costs are included in the trophy/hunting fee. This fee is determined <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2009/sep/11/trophy-hunting-africa">according</a> to staff wages – professional hunters, trackers, camp set-up, accommodation, field staff – and the government levy. </p>
<p>The government levy varies from country to country, ranging between 12% and 17% of the trophy/hunting fee in <a href="http://www.blaser-safaris.com/fileadmin/editor/pdf/afrika/mosambik_en/Blaser-Safaris_travel_info_Mozambique_South.pdf">Mozambique</a>, Tanzania and South Africa.</p>
<p>Hunting fees also range between different countries depending on the services provided. Zambia has overtaken Botswana as the most expensive. South Africa, where hunters can pay only for what they shoot, is among the cheapest.</p>
<p>The hunting fee of an elephant can be priced upwards of US$49,000 for a <a href="http://www.africanskyhunting.co.za/packages/10dayelephant.html">hunting package</a>. Lion hunting fees are dependent on the sex and origin of the animal and can be <a href="http://www.phirimasafaris.com/pricing.html">upward</a> of US$20,000. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.macmillandictionary.com/dictionary/british/canned-hunting">Canned hunting</a> is the hunting of animals that have been bred for that purpose. Although canned hunting of varies species takes place around the world, the lions have become the preferred prey. Hunted lions are <a href="http://africageographic.com/blog/one-lions-life-a-lesson-about-hunting/">sourced</a> from captivity or from the wild. The <a href="http://mg.co.za/article/2015-06-04-captive-bred-or-canned-hunting">justification</a> of canned hunting is that wild lion populations are not affected.</p>
<h2>Different approaches yield different results</h2>
<p>Wildlife tourism in Tanzania – in the form of hunting concessions, trophy licences, live animal export and non-consumptive tourism – <a href="http://www.wttc.org/-/media/files/reports/economic%20impact%20research/country%20reports/tanzania2014.pdf">generates 12%</a> of the country’s GDP.</p>
<p>Tanzanian wildlife is governed by a number of acts and departments. The Wildlife Conservation Act and the <a href="http://www.unodc.org/res/cld/document/the-national-parks-act-1959_html/National_Parks_Act_1959.pdf">National Parks Act</a> sets out the management and administration of permits in Tanzania. The Wildlife Protection Unit regulates the unlawful utilisation of wildlife.</p>
<p>As a result of this regulation, the Tanzanian government benefits from hunting through tourism and the levies paid by hunting concessions. The money then goes towards wages, maintenance and the running of protected areas, which makes up 40% of <a href="http://dtxtq4w60xqpw.cloudfront.net/sites/all/files/docpdf/session1presentationmrallanjhkijazi.pdf">Tanzania’s land mass</a>.</p>
<p>Extensive policies and legislation help Tanzania continue its hunting activities. This holds true for other sub-Saharan African countries, such as Namibia, South Africa and Mozambique. South Africa alone <a href="http://www.africanhuntinginfo.com/en/home/news/352-rsa-hunting-industry-statistics">generates</a> about US$77 million from hunting, about 0.25% of the national GDP. As a whole, Southern African Development Community <a href="http://www.fws.gov/policy/library/2005/05-17432.pdf">countries</a> with hunting tourism generate US$190 million.</p>
<h2>Zambia and Botswana take different routes</h2>
<p>Zambia and Botswana approach hunting from two opposing perspectives. Botswana placed a total <a href="http://www.survivalinternational.org/news/10112">ban</a> on hunting in 2014. </p>
<p>Zambia <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/may/19/zambia-to-lift-ban-hunting-lions-leopards-big-cats">imposed a ban</a> on hunting elephant and lion in 2012, before announced its intention to lift it last year. It finally did so earlier this year. </p>
<p>Tourism contributes <a href="http://voices.nationalgeographic.com/2012/11/15/no-more-hunting-of-any-kind-in-botswana/">around 12%</a> to Botswana’s GDP. It is estimated that hunting sustained more than <a href="http://www.environmentmagazine.org/Archives/Back%20Issues/2011/July-August%202011/exploitation-or-conservation-full.html">1000 rural</a> jobs through trophy fees. But Botswana is not <a href="https://firstforhunters.wordpress.com/2012/12/12/303/">concerned</a> about the estimated losses from the hunting ban because of predicted and historical revenue made up by the photographic tourism <a href="https://firstforhunters.wordpress.com/2012/12/12/303/">sector</a>. </p>
<p>Botswana’s hunting ban extends to all animal species and applies to locals as well as foreigners. This means that the indigenous Khoisan are no longer <a href="http://www.news24.com/Green/News/Trophy-hunters-San-unite-against-Botswana-hunting-ban-20141215">permitted</a> to practice their traditional way of life as hunter-gatherers.</p>
<p>The long-term outcome of the current approach is still to be seen. Conservationists are concerned about the ecological demands and degradation that may result from the impact of increasing elephant populations. This is particularly due to the arid conditions of Botswana and the population growth and ecological impacts of <a href="http://www.biznews.com/undictated/2015/05/04/elephant-rampage-unintended-consequence-of-botswana-hunting-ban/">elephants</a>. </p>
<p>Zambia’s wildlife tourism industry differs from Botswana significantly. An estimated 6.5% of its GDP is generated by tourism. The initial motivation behind the ban was the difficulty in enforcing regulations, monetary expenditure and wildlife population declines. To address these concerns, Zambia intends to adopt the regulation strategies of Tanzania, Mozambique and South Africa to make its <a href="http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1523-1739.1997.94389.x/abstract;jsessionid=B5740D0BAD3DD1F576F964CEF6FEAB66.f02t02">hunting industry</a> viable.</p>
<h2>Delicate balancing act</h2>
<p>African nations face pressure to ban hunting, particularly in light of the poaching <a href="http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2015/may/20/the-idea-that-hunting-saves-african-wildlife-doesnt-withstand-scrutiny">epidemic</a>. Decisions to allow hunting or ban it are based on assessing the balance between economic gain to conservation efforts.</p>
<p>Hunting can contribute to conservation efforts by <a href="http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0006320706003831">facilitating the recovery</a> of bontebok, black wildebeest, cape mountain zebra and white rhinoceros. The money generated from the hunting of these species generated funds for breeding programs, reintroduction’s, protection and management. </p>
<p>But getting the right laws and regulations in place, and then ensuring that they are implemented, is a challenge for many countries. </p>
<p>There is no uniform approach to conservation and history has proven that hunting can play a significant role – not only for conservation, but also to the benefit of neighbouring rural communities. Perhaps a cultural rather than sentimental approach to hunting is needed.</p><img src="https://counter.theconversation.com/content/44269/count.gif" alt="The Conversation" width="1" height="1" />
<p class="fine-print"><em><span>Nkabeng Maruping-Mzileni does not work for, consult, own shares in or receive funding from any company or organisation that would benefit from this article, and has disclosed no relevant affiliations beyond their academic appointment.</span></em></p>Hunting is a major source of controversy on the African continent. Many nations have strict laws against hunting while others see it as an opportunity to make money.Nkabeng Maruping-Mzileni, Lecturer in Wildlife Management and Nature Conservation, Tshwane University of TechnologyLicensed as Creative Commons – attribution, no derivatives.