Abstract
Few topics in wildlife conservation are as controversial, emotive, or command as much public and political attention, as trophy hunting. International discourses regarding trophy hunting are characterised by radically contradictory assertions, ranging from claims that trophy hunting is a humane and socially acceptable wildlife management tool which benefits more animals than it kills, to claims that it is cruel, socially unacceptable, and drives species to extinction. So, which is it? We argue that using a single, blanket term “trophy hunting” obscures substantial and important variation in how and why people pay to hunt and keep trophies. Consequently, polarised disagreements over whether “trophy hunting” is good or bad, acceptable or unacceptable, beneficial or harmful, conflate arguments about fundamentally different activities. We urge conservation scientists and practitioners, politicians, journalists, and advocates on all sides to communicate more clearly and carefully about which specific hunting activities they believe are right or wrong, beneficial or harmful, acceptable or unacceptable, to whom, and for what reasons.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Data Availability
Not applicable.
Notes
It is not clear whether the habitat protected by canned hunting operations is large enough or connected enough to contribute to conservation of wide-ranging species such as African lions.
If so, being a “trophy hunter” comes down to whether a hunter keeps any body parts as souvenirs. Under the IUCN definition, a hunter motivated by a desire to reduce wild ungulate densities and who keeps no body parts except meat would not be a trophy hunter. However, a hunter with identical motivations, but who keeps a body part as a souvenir as well as meat, would be a trophy hunter. Moreover, it is not clear whether souvenirs must be put on display in their original form to be considered trophies. For example, if a hunter makes a knife handle from antler, would that make them a trophy hunter?
Some people appear to oppose all forms of trophy hunting. This position is common in media and social media. The argument that it is never acceptable for a person to kill an individual animal for the purpose of conservation may be consistent with some vegan philosophies or anti-speciesist ethical standpoints. A related argument also occurs in the academic literature, often in connection with an ideology its proponents call “compassionate conservation”. However, these arguments are so far removed from our practical experiences of wildlife conservation and community development, as well as our pragmatic commitments to solutions that benefit people and biodiversity, that we do not address them here. But see Oommen at al. (2019) and Callen et al. (2020).
References
Blossey B, Curtis P, Boulanger J, Dávalos A (2019) Red oak seedlings as indicators of deer browse pressure: gauging the outcome of different white-tailed deer management approaches. Ecol Evol 9:13085–13103. https://doi.org/10.1002/ece3.5729
Callen A, Hayward MW, Klop-Toker K et al (2020) Envisioning the future with ‘compassionate conservation’: an ominous projection for native wildlife and biodiversity. Biol Conserv 241:108365. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108365
Carpio AJ, Apollonio M, Acevedo P (2021) Wild ungulate overabundance in Europe: contexts, causes, monitoring and management recommendations. Mamm Rev 51:95–108. https://doi.org/10.1111/mam.12221
Di Minin E, Clements HS, Correia RA et al (2021) Consequences of recreational hunting for biodiversity conservation and livelihoods. One Earth 4:238–253. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.oneear.2021.01.014
Dickman AJ, Johnson PJ, ’t Sas-Rolfes M et al (2019) Is there an elephant in the room? A response to Batavia et al. Conserv Lett 12:e12603. https://doi.org/10.1111/conl.12603
Duda MD, Beppler T, Austen DJ, Organ JF (2021) The precarious position of wildlife conservation funding in the United States. Hum Dimens Wildl 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1080/10871209.2021.1904307
Hare D, Daniels M, Blossey B (2021) Public perceptions of deer management in Scotland. Front Conserv Sci 2:781546. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcosc.2021.781546
Hart AG, Cooney R, Dickman A et al (2020) Threats posed to conservation by media misinformation. Conserv Biol 34:1333–1334. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13605
Hothorn T, Müller J (2010) Large-scale reduction of ungulate browsing by managed sport hunting. For Ecol Manage 260:1416–1423. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foreco.2010.07.019
HSI (2016) Trophy hunting by the numbers. http://www.hsi.org/assets/pdfs/report_trophy_hunting_by_the.pdf
HSI (2022) Joint position on trophy hunting. https://www.hsi.org/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/Joint-NGO-position-on-trophy-hunting_final-Logos.pdf
IFAW (2016) Killing for trophies: an analysis of global trophy hunting trade. https://www.ifaw.org/resources/killing-for-trophies
IUCN (2016) Informing decisions on trophy hunting. https://www.iucn.org/sites/dev/files/iucn_sept_briefing_paper_informingdecisionstrophyhunting.pdf%https://www.iucn.org/about/union/commissions/ceesp_ssc_sustainable_use_and_livelihoods_specialist_group/news_from_suli/
Lindsey PA, Roulet PA, Romañach SS (2007) Economic and conservation significance of the trophy hunting industry in sub-saharan Africa. Biol Conserv 134:455–469. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2006.09.005
Mitchell CD, Bleich VD, Boyer RT et al (2021) A call for more nuanced dialogues about trophy hunting. J Wildl Manage 1–5. https://doi.org/10.1002/jwmg.22017
Mkono M (2022) How we can make the trophy hunting debate less fraught. Nat Hum Behav. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41562-022-01488-3
Oommen MA, Cooney R, Ramesh M et al (2019) The fatal flaws of compassionate conservation. Conserv Biol 33:784–787. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13329
Parker BG, Khanyari M, Ambarlı H et al (2023) A review of the ecological and socioeconomic characteristics of trophy hunting across Asia. Anim Conserv 1–16. https://doi.org/10.1111/acv.12840
Thouless RH, Thouless CR (2011) Straight and crooked thinking. Hodder, London
Yeomans N, Hare D, Dröge E, Hart AG (2022) Ten years of coverage of trophy hunting in UK newspapers. Front Conserv Sci 3:1061295. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcosc.2022.1061295
Funding
The authors received no funds, grants, or other support for the preparation of this manuscript.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Contributions
D.H. had the initial idea for this manuscript and wrote the first draft. All authors reviewed and edited subsequent drafts.
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Ethical approval
Not applicable.
Competing Interest
The authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose.
Additional information
Communicated By Anurag Chaurasia
Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hare, D., Ambarlı, H., Dickman, A.J. et al. Trophy hunting is not one big thing. Biodivers Conserv 32, 2149–2153 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-023-02597-9
Received:
Revised:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-023-02597-9