What to do when you have too many elephants
Botswana’s President Mokgweetsi Masisi threatened this week to send 20,000 elephants to Germany after its Environment Ministry floated the idea of banning the import of trophies from endangered species.
The root of the president’s generosity is the long-running tension between those morally opposed to the lucrative business of big-game hunting and the impoverished countries that benefit from it — in this case Botswana, home to 130,000 elephants, nearly a third of the world’s population.
Trophies from big-game hunting are regulated by the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora, or CITES, through a permit system, but animal rights activists have long called for a complete ban on the hunting of endangered species. Germany, one of the largest importers of hunting trophies in the European Union, allowed in 26 African elephant trophies last year.
Extinction or conservation?
Animal rights advocates in Europe reject the concept of killing animals for sport and say hunting by tourists will result in the extinction of even more animal species. The opposing side of the debate — which includes not only trophy hunters but also pragmatic conservationists — says trophy hunting is controlled, unlike poaching, and has more financial benefits for local communities and for conservation than photographic tourism does.
Botswana’s offer follows a February statement to Germany’s parliament by an official in the Environment Ministry that “imports of hunting trophies of protected species should be banned.” With the governing coalition unable to agree, however, the ministry will instead “reduce overall imports of hunting trophies of protected species on the basis of species protection measures and, in individual cases, ban them entirely.”
In March, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service adopted new restrictions on U.S. imports of African elephant hunting trophies and live elephants. The amendment requires, among other things, that “authorized imports of trophies and live elephants will contribute to enhancing conservation and not contribute to the decline of the species.”
Animal protection groups, however, have long contested the financial benefits for communities and conservation. A January report, supported by more than 30 nongovernmental organizations, says that “quotas are rarely based on
reliable scientific data, and are typically designed or found to be abused to maximise profits.”
“The main beneficiaries of hunting revenues are hunting outfitters, officials or government entities managing hunting, and foreign hunting tour operators,” the report says.
Amy Dickman, a conservation biologist at the University of Oxford, said Botswana and many other countries are “really fed up” with Western countries dictating how they handle their natural resources, “Telling them what to do with their wildlife is seen as very hypocritical, particularly around this issue of trophy hunting,” Dickman said, pointing to the deep-seated tradition of domestic hunting in Britain, the United States and Germany. “It seems deeply hypocritical to these countries to say, ‘Do as we say, not as we do.’”
Protection or management?
Speaking to the German tabloid Bild, Masisi argued that Germany’s planned restrictions on trophy hunting would promote poverty and poaching in Botswana and damage the country. “It is very easy to sit in Berlin and have an opinion about our affairs in Botswana. We are paying the price for preserving these animals for the world,” he said. The Germans should “live with the animals the way you try to tell us to.”
“This is no joke,” he added. Masisi blamed decades of conservation efforts for the “overpopulation” of elephants and said herds are causing damage to property, eating crops and trampling residents. He has said in the past that the elephant population, which nearly doubled between 1996 and 2014 because of strict anti-poaching measures, is too much for the fragile, drought-stricken environment, home to just 2.5 million people. Botswana banned trophy hunting
2014 but lifted the restrictions in 2019 after pressure from local communities. A 2017 report found that local communities were particularly affected by a loss of income, jobs and provision of social services because of the ban. The country now issues annual hunting quotas.
Dickman, who doesn’t advocate hunting herself, said governments should be cautious about being driven solely by the concerns of animal protection groups. “They want [wildlife] managed in this utopian, kind of Disneyesque way — that we should just leave wildlife alone, and it will be fine,” she said.
“And I think that’s just not the reality of wildlife conservation anymore. It’s increasingly having to be managed alongside human development, making sure that there’s enough space for wildlife while balancing that with human needs and development and ensuring there’s enough revenue coming in.”
At the same time, trophy hunting should not be confused with a means of population control, Dickman said. The benefit for affected areas, she said, lies in the revenue. A cursory online search puts 12-day hunting packages at about $50,000 — though it is unclear how much of that reaches local residents.
Botswana or Germany?
“Botswana issues permits of maybe a few hundred in a year. So [trophy hunting] is never going to affect the population at the country level. It’s relatively small numbers of animals. It’s highly regulated, but it brings in large amounts of revenue per tourist,” she added.
In some cases, Masisi’s elephant offers have borne fruit. Some 8,000 elephants have already been given to neighboring Angola and 500 to Mozambique. “And that’s exactly how we would like to offer such a gift to Germany,” Masisi said. “We won’t take no for an answer.”
A spokesperson in the German Environment Ministry told The Post that Botswana has not yet contacted it regarding the matter.