Beyond the Bullet: Why Sustainable Trophy Hunting is Vital for South African Communities and Conservation

A recent study published in Biological Conservation (Vol 309, September 2025), amplified by various news outlets, claims widespread community rejection of trophy hunting near Kruger National Park (KNP) and suggests exploring alternative livelihoods. However, this research, seemingly rooted in animal rights ideology rather than robust conservation science or African socio-economic realities, paints a misleading picture of the complex relationship between rural communities, wildlife, and sustainable-use practices. Ethical, regulated trophy hunting is not merely an optional income stream but a critical pillar of conservation and community development, delivering quantifiable economic and social benefits that proposed alternatives simply cannot match. 

A Generalized Lens: The Study’s Methodological Shortcomings

The contentious study’s methodology raises significant concerns about its accuracy and representativeness. Dr. Ndlovu Wiseman, a key figure in South African community-based conservation, highlights that the research surveyed 1,551 household heads from 12 communities adjacent to KNP, none of which are peripheries in which actual hunting occurs, such as in Associated Private Nature Reserves (APNR) like Timbavati or Balule. This fundamental sampling flaw means the surveyed households are not directly involved in regulated trophy hunting; instead, they face indirect impacts or poaching implications. It is thus unsurprising that many interviewees do not perceive regulated trophy hunting as a meaningful income stream.

(Image: Map of the Greater Kruger, Africa Geographic)

Furthermore, Dr. Wiseman notes that the study “minimally explained” consumptive uses like trophy hunting, defining it vaguely as “killing for food or sale” without detailing the processes, revenues, compliance laws, or employment numbers associated with it. This lack of crucial context likely skewed responses, fostering opposition stemming from a lack of informed understanding, rather than actual lived experience or direct engagement with the industry. 

The public pressure against hunting is largely manufactured by foreign NGOs and urban-based lobby groups rooted in animal rights ideology, often misrepresenting facts and vilifying regulated hunting without engaging the voices of landowners or rural custodians directly involved and supported by sustainable-use practices. The fact that the study was funded by World Animal Protection (WAP), and at least three of its authors are employed by or formerly associated with WAP further calls into question the neutrality of the research and its conclusions.

The Undeniable Economic Contribution of Hunting Tourism

Contrary to the narrative promoting alternatives, recent scientific research unequivocally demonstrates the significant economic contributions of hunting tourism to the South African economy. A pioneering post-COVID-19 analysis by Prof. van der Merwe and Dr. Saayman (2025) found that hunting tourism’s total impact on the South African economy is a staggering USD2.5 billion (Approx. R44 340 219 250,00). For every USD1 (Approx. R17,74)  spent by hunting tourists, production in the economy increases by an additional USD1.97 (Approx. R34,97), resulting in a production multiplier of 2.97.

This economic activity translates directly into substantial household income benefits, totalling USD2.586 billion (Approx. R45 893 095 500), with an income multiplier of 3.02. Importantly, hunting tourism directly and indirectly supports and expands job creation in rural areas, generating approximately 95,000 job opportunities in South Africa. These jobs are particularly crucial for lower-skilled workers, who are most vulnerable to unemployment, with over 60% of job opportunities depending on hunting tourism falling within these categories (e.g., trackers, skinners, farm workers, cleaning and maintenance staff). The agricultural sector, along with trade, accommodation, and personal services, are the industry sectors most dependent on hunting tourism.

Trophy Hunting: A Proven Conservation Tool and Catalyst for Rewilding

The claim that alternatives to trophy hunting are needed ignores the proven conservation benefits of regulated hunting. Trophy hunting, when well-managed, incentivizes keeping wild land wild, placing significant value on intact ecosystems and large, free-ranging species. It doesn’t require land clearance or conflict with the ecosystem; instead, it works with it.

South Africa’s private wildlife industry is a testament to this, with an estimated 20.5 million hectares of land used for private game reserves, exceeding the 8 million hectares of state-owned conservation areas, including national parks. These private lands, often converted from former agricultural land, actively (re)introduce wild animals to create new wilderness areas, called ‘rewilding’. Research indicates that these private ranches protect globally significant populations of wild ungulates, with approximately three to four times more animals than government-protected areas, demonstrating how sustainable-use can lead to rewilding and thriving wildlife populations. 

The financial incentives derived from hunting are a powerful driver for conservation. Catherine Semcer’s testimony before the U.S. House Natural Resources Committee noted that 13 African nations, including South Africa, utilize trophy hunting to achieve their conservation goals. These hunting areas collectively conserve approximately 344 million acres (Approx. 139 211 860,931 hectares) of wildlife habitat in Sub-Saharan Africa, surpassing the expanse covered by national parks by 22%. 

A prominent example is the recovery of the southern white rhino population in South Africa, which increased from 840 animals in 1960 (when hunting the species was illegal) to over 18,000 – largely due to financial incentives from trophy hunting. Semcer stated in her address: “The size of the market for rhino hunting and the profits that could be generated led South African landowners to intentionally populate their land with rhinos, as well as breed them to the point that their number has now increased to more than 18,000. This has made South Africa home to 93% of the world’s remaining white rhinos.” 

Furthermore, trophy hunting revenues often directly fund conservation initiatives like anti-poaching efforts and habitat restoration. In Tanzania, for example, the Wildlife Management Authority receives 60% of its income from trophy hunting license fees. The absence of such revenue can have devastating consequences. After U.S. and EU bans on lion trophy imports from Tanzania, anti-poaching funding decreased by 23%, leading to a decline in the ability to safeguard wildlife.

Tangible Benefits for Local Communities

Beyond macroeconomic figures, trophy hunting delivers direct, tangible benefits to rural communities:

• Infrastructure and Services: Dr. Wiseman confirms that hunting revenue generates funds for community trusts, funding crucial infrastructure like schools and clinics. In Namibia, the Anabeb Conservancy used hunting revenue to provide tap water to all 200 households, build a kindergarten, upgrade school ablution facilities, and even purchase an ambulance for the local clinic, significantly improving health and educational services.

• Poverty Alleviation and Food Security: Hunting tourism plays an important role in income generation and poverty reduction for low- and middle-income households, particularly in rural and lower-income areas. It also contributes to food security. In Zambia, trophy hunting annually provides over 286,000 pounds of meat (valued at USD600,000, approx. R10 645 452) to adjacent rural communities. 

• Empowerment and Reduced Poaching: Trophy hunting empowers communities through shared decision-making in wildlife forums. Importantly, it helps reduce poaching by providing legal economic alternatives to communities who might otherwise turn to illegal activities for survival. In an article written by Emmanuel Koro, titled “Why rural communities choose wildlife hunting over cattle”, Koro highlights that in the Anabeb Conservancy in Namibia, former poachers became protectors of wildlife because they recognized the direct benefits from sustainable hunting.

• Human-Wildlife Conflict Mitigation: Hunting revenues provide a critical mechanism to address human-wildlife conflict. By assigning a direct economic value to wildlife, especially predators, communities are incentivized to tolerate and conserve these species rather than resorting to retaliatory killings.

  
  

The Illusion of Alternatives

The study’s proposed alternatives – such as vegetable farming, beekeeping, craft-making, or a “lion levy” – are not realistic full replacements for hunting revenue. Trevor Oertel points out, in a recent rebuttal published in Daily Maverick, in collaboration with SUCo-SA, these are “hardly equivalent in income potential, ecological compatibility, or how they would incentivise conservation”. Vegetable farming in buffer zones, for instance, risks increasing human-wildlife conflict due to crop raiding and water access issues, concerns that the study “glosses over”.

Dr. Wiseman emphasizes that while alternatives may show high theoretical support from communities with limited knowledge, they face significant implementation barriers like market access, upfront investment, and skills training, often failing due to market saturation or climate vulnerabilities. Professor Francis Vorhies, a distinguished expert in conservation economics and finance, and the Director and Co-Founder of AWEI, argues that the focus should not be on “alternatives” but rather on developing diversified wildlife-based enterprises that deliver revenues from various sources, including hunting, fishing, and foraging. This diversification is key to mitigating risks associated with the loss of any single revenue stream and building a resilient wildlife economy.

“Amid South Africa’s unemployment crisis, anger at non-inclusive activities could turn to unrest if benefits vanish without viable replacements.” -Dr. Ndlovu Wiseman

The idea of a “lion levy” on international tourists, while presented as an alternative, assumes steady visitor numbers, ignoring post-pandemic fluctuations or competitive markets. Furthermore, relying solely on such a levy risks the same dependency on external funds that sustainable hunting aims to reduce.

Conclusion: Local-led Solutions

The debate about trophy hunting must move beyond emotion and ideology to focus on what truly works for conservation and for the people who live with wildlife every day. The presented study, with its methodological flaws and inherent biases, regrettably contributes to a manufactured public pressure that threatens a proven, science-backed conservation tool. 

WRSA advocates that the significant economic impact, robust job creation (especially for lower-skilled rural workers), tangible community benefits, and unparalleled contributions to habitat conservation and rewilding demonstrate that ethical, regulated trophy hunting is not irrelevant but an integral and irreplaceable component of South Africa’s Agro-sustainable Biodiversity Wildlife Economy. 

Real conservation solutions must be led by local needs, backed by science, and shielded from ideological interference. WRSA urges policymakers and the public to consider the comprehensive evidence supporting trophy hunting’s vital role in securing a prosperous future for both South Africa’s wildlife and its rural communities.

Sources

1. Koro, E. (2021) ‘Why rural communities choose wildlife hunting over cattle’, African Geographic, 19 August. Available at: https://africageographic.com/stories/why-rural-communities-choose-trophy-hunting-over-cattle/  (Accessed: 12 April 2025).

2. Moorhouse, T.P., Ntuli, H., Nketiah, P., Elwin, A. & D’Cruze, N.C. (2025) ‘Attitudes of local communities to wildlife conservation and non-consumptive, alternative income sources, near Kruger National Park, South Africa’, Biological Conservation, 309, p. 111331. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2025.111331.

3. Saayman, M., van der Merwe, P. & Saayman, A. (2018) ‘The economic impact of trophy hunting in the South African wildlife industry’, Global Ecology and Conservation, 16, p. e00510. doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2018.e00510.

4. Semcer, C.E. (2019) ‘Conservationists Should Support Trophy Hunting’, conservationfrontlines.org. Available at: https://conservationfrontlines.org/2019/10/conservationists-should-support-trophy-hunting/ .

5. Semcer, C.E. (2019) The Role of Hunting in Conserving African Wildlife Catherine Semcer’s testimony before the U.S. House Natural Resources Committee on the “CECIL Act”. Property and Environment Research Center (PERC), 18 July. Available at: https://www.perc.org/2019/07/18/the-role-of-hunting-in-conserving-african-wildlife/ (Accessed: 10 April 2025).

6. Oertel, T. (2025) ‘Trophy Hunting in the greater Kruger area – what the study overlooks’, Daily Maverick, 14 August. Available at: https://www.dailymaverick.co.za/opinionista/2025-08-14-trophy-hunting-in-the-greater-kruger-area-what-the-study-overlooks/

7. Thomson, G. (2013) ‘Trophy hunting in the context of community conservation’, Opinion Editorial post series. Available at: https://africageographic.com/stories/trophy-hunting-in-the-context-of-community-conservation/ 

8. Van der Merwe, P. & Saayman, A. (2025) ‘Assessing the contributions of hunting tourism to the South African economy: a post-covid analysis’, Wildlife Research, 52, p. WR24192. doi:10.1071/WR24192. 

9. Van der Merwe, P. & Slabbert, E. (2025) ‘The (ir)relevance of hunting tourism to rural communities: A hunter perspective’, Development Southern Africa, 42(1), pp. 136–152. doi:10.1080/0376835X.2024.2443406.

10. Vorhies, F. (2025) Interview transcript. 20 August. (Unpublished interview transcript).

11. Wiseman, N. (2025) Interview transcript. 20 August. (Unpublished interview transcript).