Before the two hunters from Texas had breakfast, Stewart Dorrington drove through his 4,856-hectare game ranch. As the early-morning sun cast a soft glow on the landscape, turned a wintry pale brown, buffaloes wandered in the tall grass and giraffes appeared in a cluster of trees.
Dorrington drove on, pointing to a blind where his US clients would wait for a target to shoot with their bows. He moved on, past a house rebuilt after a fire during his mother’s childhood, then a dam raised by his grandfather, memory and longing melting into the South African Bushveld.
Then kudu antelopes sprinted across a clearing. Dorrington quickly turned to the business at hand.
Illustration: Constance Chou
“My trophy hunting price is US$2,500” for a kudu, more than 10 times what he would sell one of the animals for meat, he said.
“You stop trophy hunting, the live market is going to change completely; it’ll go to meat value, really,” less than US$0.60 a pound (454g), he added. “So that will deprive the national parks and the provincial parks of a lot of their budget.”
Many scientists agree with him.
Despite intensifying calls to ban or restrict trophy hunting in Africa after the killing of a lion named Cecil in Zimbabwe, most conservation groups, wildlife management experts and African governments support the practice as a way to maintain wildlife. Hunting, they contend, is part of a complex economy that has so far proven to be the most effective method of conservation, not only in Africa, but around the world.
While hunting is banned in government parks in South Africa, animals inside their boundaries are routinely sold to game ranches when their populations are considered excessive, generating money to maintain habitats and fight poachers.
And because trophy hunting is legal in private game reserves, conservationists contend the animals end up fetching higher prices than they would if killed for food or other reasons. Lion hunts, one of the most lucrative forms of trophy hunting, bring in between US$24,000 and US$71,000 per outing on average across Africa, according to a 2012 study.
In southern Africa, the emergence of a regulated trophy hunting industry on private game ranches in the 1960s helped restore vast stretches of degraded habitats and revive certain species, like the southern white rhinoceros, which had been hunted almost to extinction, conservationists say.
A similar shift occurred in the US decades earlier when the Pittman-Robertson Act of 1937 allocated the proceeds from hunting to bring back lands and animals, they say.
“There’s only two places on Earth where wildlife at a large scale has actually increased in the 20th century, and those are North America and southern Africa,” zoologist and chairwoman of the International Union for Conservation of Nature’s Sustainable Use and Livelihoods Specialist Group Rosie Cooney said.
“Both of those models of conservation were built around hunting,” she said.
Opposition to trophy hunting by animal rights groups grew after Cecil, the Zimbabwean lion who had been collared and tracked by researchers for years, was killed by a US dentist from Minnesota.
The Zimbabwean professional hunter who organized the hunt is scheduled to appear in court next month. Zimbabwe’s government, which has long had antagonistic relations with the West, has called for the US hunter’s extradition, and this week Zimbabwean President Robert Mugabe blamed foreign “vandals” for the lion’s death.
As condemnation spread across social media, several airline carriers announced that they would stop transporting parts of certain animals killed in trophy hunts. The carriers included Delta Air Lines, American Airlines and United Airlines, headquartered in the US, the biggest source by far of trophy hunters in Africa.
The governments of South Africa and Namibia, a country regarded as a model for hunting programs that benefit local communities, decried the moves.
“This will be the end of conservation in Namibia,” Namibian Deputy Minister of Environment and Tourism Pohamba Shifeta said last week, according to the Namibia Press Agency.
Animal rights groups say it is simply unethical to kill animals in the name of conservation. They contend — and most conservationists agree — that there are problems with trophy hunting. Proceeds from hunting are not always funneled into conservation efforts. Unlike those in Namibia, hunting programs elsewhere, including a long-existing one in Zimbabwe, fail to bring full benefits to local populations.
Trophy hunting is allowed in more than 20 African nations, although the rules vary greatly. In many places, permits are sold to hunt specific animals, often ones past breeding age. Quotas are set to maintain the populations of certain species, while the hunting of endangered ones, like the black rhinoceros, is illegal or severely restricted.
In South Africa, home to the biggest hunting industry on the continent, it is legal to hunt most big-game animals inside private ranches, including the big five: lions, white rhinoceroses, elephants, leopards and buffaloes.
However, some practices have drawn widespread criticism. In South Africa, animals are sometimes moved between game ranches to satisfy clients, a practice known as “put-and-take.” A more serious problem in recent years — the so-called canned hunting of lions bred in captivity — has hurt the reputation of South Africa’s hunting industry and split its members.
Despite trophy hunting’s problems, most conservationists believe the positives still outweigh the negatives. The reality in Africa, they say, is that most animals, including elephants, rhinos and lions, are not killed by trophy hunters.
Instead, they are killed by local residents for meat or in clashes as wild habitats shrink, Africa urbanizes and the continent’s population grows at the fastest pace in the world, but above all, the animals are illegally slaughtered by highly organized, heavily-armed poachers who sell ivory and organs, mostly to Chinese markets.
“Most of the illegal offtake results from illicit wildlife trafficking,” African Wildlife Foundation ecologist and program director Jimmiel Mandima said.
Mandima, who led the foundation’s efforts in his native Zimbabwe for nine years, described killings like the one that claimed Cecil as a “less frequent occurrence.”
“A lot of the professional hunters tend to follow very strict procedures on how they do their hunting,” he said, adding that the enforcement of trophy hunting regulations varies by country.
Animal rights groups hope to curb trophy hunting by pressuring the US Fish and Wildlife Service to classify lions as an endangered species, which would make it difficult for hunters to take lion trophies into the US. The International Union for Conservation of Nature’s red list, the most comprehensive catalog of the world’s threatened species, ranks lions as “vulnerable,” below “endangered” and “critically endangered.”
Overhunting has decreased the number of lions in some areas, especially Tanzania, according to a 2012 study by researchers affiliated with universities and Panthera, a New York-based wild cat protection group. Still, the researchers concluded that overhunting was a smaller risk than a blanket ban.
One of the study’s authors, Vernon Booth, a Zimbabwe-based ecologist who has worked in wildlife management for 30 years in Africa, said lions were now protected because of the high value attached to them as trophies. Locals tolerate them because of the income that trickles down. Without the trophy hunt money, locals would increasingly poison lions, which are considered dangerous to people and livestock, he said.
“If there is a complete ban on lion hunting, the tolerance levels for lions would just plummet,” Booth said. “And in wild areas outside of the protected areas, lions would be exterminated, and very quickly.”
“Even though hunting may seem unpalatable to a lot of people around the world, it is actually very, very necessary,” he added.
For many, trophy hunting recalls some of the most unsavory aspects of Africa’s colonial past. A framed photograph in the dining hall of Dorrington’s game ranch shows two white hunters towering over a black man holding their freshly-caught game. One of the white men rests his left hand on the black man’s head, as if petting him.
Trophy hunting is often difficult to detach from an era of unquestioned white privilege in Africa, Dorrington, 56, said.
“It’s something for the elites, the rich whites, to play on,” he said of game ranches. “And that’s one of the challenges, to get benefits from wildlife to the black population.”
Dorrington said his game ranch, less than 322km northwest of Johannesburg, employs 12 full-time black workers and donates to the local community and school. Like many cattle ranchers, Dorrington began transforming his land, which his great-grandfather secured in 1918, into a game ranch in the 1980s, specializing in bow hunting.
Dorrington spends a few months a year marketing in the US, the source of 95 percent of his business. His customers spend an average of US$7,000 per trip and kill between 120 and 140 animals per year, he said. After kudu, the most popular animals are impalas and warthogs, for which he charges US$400 and US$350 per animal.
All three animals are popular, because they make attractive trophies, he said, explaining why the airline ban could hurt his business.
“You see that tsessebe?” he said, nodding at an antelope-like animal whose trophy price is US$2,200. “They’re not a very pretty animal, but they’re rare. We’ve got too many of them. If I find a hunter that wants one, I’m very happy.”
Saudi Arabian largesse is flooding Egypt’s cultural scene, but the reception is mixed. Some welcome new “cooperation” between two regional powerhouses, while others fear a hostile takeover by Riyadh. In Cairo, historically the cultural capital of the Arab world, Egyptian Minister of Culture Nevine al-Kilany recently hosted Saudi Arabian General Entertainment Authority chairman Turki al-Sheikh. The deep-pocketed al-Sheikh has emerged as a Medici-like patron for Egypt’s cultural elite, courted by Cairo’s top talent to produce a slew of forthcoming films. A new three-way agreement between al-Sheikh, Kilany and United Media Services — a multi-media conglomerate linked to state intelligence that owns much of
The US and other countries should take concrete steps to confront the threats from Beijing to avoid war, US Representative Mario Diaz-Balart said in an interview with Voice of America on March 13. The US should use “every diplomatic economic tool at our disposal to treat China as what it is... to avoid war,” Diaz-Balart said. Giving an example of what the US could do, he said that it has to be more aggressive in its military sales to Taiwan. Actions by cross-party US lawmakers in the past few years such as meeting with Taiwanese officials in Washington and Taipei, and
The Republic of China (ROC) on Taiwan has no official diplomatic allies in the EU. With the exception of the Vatican, it has no official allies in Europe at all. This does not prevent the ROC — Taiwan — from having close relations with EU member states and other European countries. The exact nature of the relationship does bear revisiting, if only to clarify what is a very complicated and sensitive idea, the details of which leave considerable room for misunderstanding, misrepresentation and disagreement. Only this week, President Tsai Ing-wen (蔡英文) received members of the European Parliament’s Delegation for Relations
Denmark’s “one China” policy more and more resembles Beijing’s “one China” principle. At least, this is how things appear. In recent interactions with the Danish state, such as applying for residency permits, a Taiwanese’s nationality would be listed as “China.” That designation occurs for a Taiwanese student coming to Denmark or a Danish citizen arriving in Denmark with, for example, their Taiwanese partner. Details of this were published on Sunday in an article in the Danish daily Berlingske written by Alexander Sjoberg and Tobias Reinwald. The pretext for this new practice is that Denmark does not recognize Taiwan as a state under