Hunt a Leopard for $4,400 and Promote Conservation in Uganda
At the same time as Botswana bans hunting close to its reserves and Kenya uses Maasai hunters to protect its lions, Uganda introduces commercial hunting into its Pian-Upe wildlife reserve in Uganda hoping to improve conservation.
Hunting to Conserve in Uganda
Edyau Echodu, the warden of the Uganda Wildlife Authority’s Pian-Upe wildlife reserve, introduced the hunting plan. He said that hunting would help get rid of old animals that attack human settlements, killing and injuring people and damaging crops. He acknowledged that it was also aimed at increasing earnings from tourists.
- » See also: Mistaken Identity: Hunters Kill Endangered Pygmy Hippo During Pig Hunt!
- » Get EcoWorldly by RSS or sign up by email.
A hunter will pay $4,000 for shooting a leopard, $2,200 a buffalo, $1,700 a hippopotamus and, $200 a hyena. While the hide and horns will belong to the hunter the communities living around the reserve will receive 75% of the fees as well as any meat.
It is hoped that this income and the control of rogue animals will improve the relationship between the wildlife reserve and the surrounding communities. This is expected to bring communities to appreciate and protect the wildlife, thereby promoting conservation.
There is likely to be good demand from hunters, as the prices are much cheaper than those in South Africa, where commercial hunting is already practiced. There, large buck are hunted for $2,000 to $3,000 a head. The average price for a lion is around $15,000 although a white lion was recently hunted for $160,000. However, sport hunting in South Africa is done on commercial game farms rather than in reserves.
Meanwhile, Botswana Halts Hunting
In contrast, the government of Botswana recently decided to stop hunting activities in areas near national parks and game reserves. Hunting here had been allowed for the past 18 years and was managed by Community Trusts, which had a mandate to manage their natural resources.
However, it was discovered that the trusts were not a suitable mechanism as they had difficulty in managing expenditure to the benefit of all and often unfairly benefited select individuals.
Managing Co-existence in Kenya
In Kenya the Kilimanjaro Lion Conservation Project (KLCP) operates in the Mbirikani and Kuku Group Ranches which are communally owned by several thousand Maasai families who graze their livestock there. The Maasai are used to living in harmony with wildlife, but recently came into conflict with lions due to their livestock. This resulted in the quick and drastic reduction in lion numbers the project is trying to reverse.
The project appoints Lion Guardians, young Maasai men who know lions well. They investigate livestock killings and can arrange compensation. In addition, they help search for stray livestock, interceding if they hear that a lion hunt is getting under way. They also collect information on lion behavior and try to change cattle handling practices appropriately.
Image credit: edg1 via flickr, under a creative commons license.
I admit that I hadn’t heard of this kind of conservation strategy before. I’m leaning toward evil money making scheme on this one since it doesn’t seem like the majority of real poachers could afford the price of hunting. However, maybe by increasing the availability of pelts etc. on the market they’ll drive down their price and therefore the incentive to poach? Also, community development is always good.
sometimes i wonder how governments come up with things like this and think that they’re a good idea. but hey, one man’s junk is another’s treasure right?
on the surface, this certainly isn’t about respecting conservation, though it could have elements of education if contextualized right…but i have to wonder what the big picture actually looks like with this in it. afterall, this still hunting, people, is that really a sport?
Re: hunting being a sport, good question. I wonder if this sort of thing appeals more for those who hunt for fun or those who hunt for necessity.
It is proven time and time again in countries where hunting is permitted wildlife populations have increased, which is contrary to what those who do not hunt may think.
Hunting brings in substantial revenue to the local community, government and helps curb commerical and subsitence poaching of wildlife. Keep in mind that trophy hunters only hunt those animals that are old (i,e. the biggest of a species) so do not interfere with growing populations and younger breeding animals. Poachers do not select what they kill.
History proves that those countries that permit properly organised and managed trophy hunting have the best game populations and those that do not permit trophy hunting lose their game populations fastest. If the locals can place a value on the game because it brings them food and jobs etc, they will conserve the game. If not, they see the game as competition and will kill it asap to ensure their oen survival.
This plan is the best thing for Ugandan game populations and the Ugandan people.
Is this a tourist scheme, or a legitimate conservation initiative? To me, it’s just another sign of ecological imbalance. As humans continue to encroach on the lands of the large predators, we will see more and more of this.
You have to use what works. In Kenya the wildlife is easily seen because it has wide open areas and it makes sense to ban hunting since you can make just as much money with tourists photographing the animals. In Uganda it is more forested and not as productive for wildlife viewing but perfect for the trophy game hunter. The cash raised from hunting will benefit ALL the wildlife not justthe huntable species. But it must be documented and controlled in order to not be over hunted. As far as leopards they are not easy to hunt so that should not be a problem.