Botswana might need to stock up on packaging for the bulky “gift” it wants to send Germany: 20,000 live elephants.
The African country expects Germans to enjoy the present as much as your friend who lives in a studio would appreciate receiving a pool table. Botswana’s President Mokgweetsi Masisi made the rhetorical offering this week as he lashed out at a proposed German ban on trophy elephant imports. Botswana’s government is worried the embargo would encourage poaching and threaten not only any fragile items within an elephant’s path but also the nation’s economic interests.
Masisi said in an interview with the German magazine Bild that the enormous animals are a major nuisance to locals—and that heavily regulated hunting is an acceptable way to manage their population. Masisi claims it’s easy to worry about trophy hunting from the comfort of Berlin’s elephantless environment. He recommended Germans try to “live together with the animals” before judging Botswanans, who cohabitate with Africa’s largest elephant population of 131,000.
- Locals say that elephants devour crops, trample property, and, in some cases, kill people.
- Their numbers swelled after the country banned trophy hunting in 2014, only to repeal the measure five years later in response to complaints from affected communities.
Germany isn’t the only concerned country: The UK is mulling its own ban (which prompted Botswana’s president to threaten to send elephants to London’s Hyde Park), and the US issued new regulations last month tightening rules around elephant trophy imports.
The heated international trade dispute—and elephant shipping threats—spotlights how the controversial practice of shooting wild animals for sport has a complex web of ramifications. Trophy hunting’s proponents say it’s an economic boon that can help support conservation efforts, while animal rights activists decry it as animal murder by wealthy vacationers.
Hunting dollars
Germans and other foreigners hunting elephants is a major source of income for Botswana. Hunters pay up to $50,000 for each elephant killed, and Botswana’s government said the practice brought $5 million to local communities in 2021.
Become smarter in just 5 minutes
Morning Brew delivers quick and insightful updates about the business world every day of the week from Wall St. to Silicon Valley.
The business of hunting brings a cash windfall across sub-Saharan Africa, a region known for its rich fauna. Most revenue comes from elephants, lions, rhinos, and other large game you’d expect to see on a safari. Trophy hunters injected $250 million into South Africa’s economy yearly and supported 17,000 jobs, according to one estimate in 2018.
In some instances, regulated hunting can actually contribute to protecting endangered species.
Proponents say that well-managed hunting programs provide conservation funding and incentives to maintain nature preserves, preventing habitat loss and enhancing biodiversity. Among those who aren’t necessarily troubled by trophy hunting is the World Wildlife Fund, a conservation NGO. It says it’s not opposed to “locally managed, responsible hunting” as long as it doesn’t target endangered species and brings revenue to conservation.
Many experts believe that banning the practice would ultimately hurt the people and animals that rely on economic and conservation benefits. In 2019, 128 worried scientists came out against trophy hunting bans and urged the international community to study the evidence and reform hunting instead.
Problematic leisure
On the other side, organizations concerned about animal suffering claim that the revenue from trophy hunting could be replaced with proceeds from bloodless photo tourism.
Some hunting critics also note that the tourist revenues generated by hunting aren’t equally distributed, with rural communities often receiving just a fraction of the financial benefits.
Beyond the ethical concerns around trophy hunting in general and various questionable methods employed by some who engage in it, animal rights groups like the Humane Society International say that the economic and conservation benefits are overstated by pro-hunting organizations.
Big picture: More research may be needed to sort out trophy hunting’s real impact. Reliable scientific evidence on the topic is limited since much of the research is funded by advocacy groups with strong opinions.
