Community and Conservation – Botswana and Trophy Hunting

Akeefah lal-Mahomed / Aug 5 / Hunting

The 2014 hunting bans in Botswana were a collection of policies surrounding the activity of hunting that covered all wildlife. These bans have been lifted in 2019 by newly appointed President. Conservationists in the west criticised the African country for prioritising  people over the flourishing of wildlife, describing tales of the negative effects of Botswana’s wildlife tourism industry on biodiversity. More developed western nations often wield rhetoric valuing animal livelihood on par with that of a human, ignoring that for a large part of the world this is not the case. For nations such as Botswana, which are still developing, trophy hunting sustains communities. The narrative is often depicted as community versus conservation however, despite our ethical disapproval, wildlife tourism may be done sustainably for both humans and wildlife.

“We had a lot of complaints from local communities…In Africa, a human being is more important than an animal. I don’t know about the Western world,”

Hunting reflects a long discourse with power. It is tied to notions of identity and citizenships, building a history from subsistence hunting to symbols of resistance against colonising powers. The question of how citizens are/are not permitted to use resources have long been influenced by western priorities. Even now, institutions often ignore cultural and regional diversity which disempower local communities’ control over development. Nations are sovereign and to impose inappropriate western ideology is to further colonise the narrative of how development should be done. Responsively, there is a growing scepticism amongst African nations regarding agendas from the global north aimed at tackling inequality.

       A Bit about Botswana

As colonial laws echoed the west, hunting became an activity of luxury and a stigma began towards subsistence land use and commercial game. This hierarchy was institutionalised through restrictions, access to technology and taxation. Today, hunting tourists consist of regional elites and western citizens – in particular, the United States. Whilst hunting is continually restricted as a cultural practice, it is encouraged as an elitist sporting game. This dynamic has only been worsened through the hunting ban’s abolishment of Special Gaming Licenses (SGL) which was not reinstated in 2019, meaning groups such as the San tribe can no longer engage in subsistence hunting.

In developing nations across the world tourism has become an avenue for economic development, and subsequently a better quality of life. Particularly across Africa, wildlife-based tourism such as Safari Parks is a low-cost and highly profitable utilisation of land. For each party, Botswana’s citizens gain from hunting charges, non-hunting entertainment, and free/auctioned game meat. The industry is nonetheless dominated by international elites in joint venture partnerships, perpetuating post-colonial hierarchies, however, a Community-Based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) has allowed citizens to reclaim the industry to their benefit. Community-based management frameworks are seen across the African continent as a model for personalised and localised rural development and sustainable resource use. This framework has been successful for bottom-up poverty alleviation through the years, improving livelihoods and creating positive attitudes towards conservation.

       The Ban

The hunting bans were introduced by former President Ian Khama under the praise of the international community and conservationist groups. Whilst pleasing external groups, internally this resulted in economic pressures and discontent as locals suffered reductions in tourism and destruction of agriculture. Firstly, tourism diversification had limited success in peripheral areas. Photographic tourism was resented by locals as it requires extra marketing and substantial capital investment which they do not have, creating greater reliance on international investors in joint venture partnerships and/or reduced quality of life. Trophy hunting is also more resilient to external shocks as clients are willing to hunt in areas lacking attractive scenery or diversity of entertainment. As Botswanans were unable to utilise their territories, negative attitudes developed towards wildlife conservation and incidents of poaching increased through Northern Botswana. Additionally, poorer households did not have the capacity to manage the damage of crops, cattle, and property from the increased presence of large herds of animals. The “exponential increase in conflicts between animals and human beings” meant that communities were living “in fear…run[ing] into our houses and hide”.

       “When hunting was introduced, we actually ended up killing less animals,” Dr. Child said. “That’s the irony.”

The transition had been justified along ecological lines without fully engaging with the social and environmental impacts. Botswana prides itself on ‘therisanyo’, its principle of consultation which has allowed open dialogue with the general population since its independence. The lack of consultation is in direct contradiction to the CBNRM which sets out to avoid “centralised command and control systems which were not succeeding in conserving natural resources”. Western notions placing animal value akin to human well-being on a black/white ethical basis are largely misjudged from a place of privilege. As the global market changed under capitalism so did the means of existence; the animal is still essential to the survival of many. The ban meant reductions in the availability of meat, in employment opportunities, in children in schools, and more due to reductions in Community-Based Organisations (akin to an informal mechanism for social services).

       “Before, when there was hunting, we wanted to protect those animals because we knew we earned something out of them. Now we don’t benefit at all from the animals” - Villager

       Worse than Before

Discontent from unsustainable livelihoods during the ban has allowed for the establishment of policies to a questionable in necessity. For example, citizen hunting licences that were previously phased out under the CBNRM in favour of a more environmentally friendly fee-for-service model have been reinstated. This is alongside the disbarment of anti-poaching groups and rights to lobby the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITIES), allowing for “aggressive efforts [to] reopen [the] ivory trade”.

Yet, the SGLs have not been reinstated. The limitation of subsistence cultural hunting continues to contribute to cultural decay and issues surrounding citizenship for marginalised communities in Botswana. The push to force communities into a modernisation agenda narrated by the western world is a continuation of colonial narratives which looked down on communities engaging in subsistence/commercial hunting whilst upholding the same activity for elites as a luxury sport. Institutions purposefully lack inclusive frameworks for marginalised communities in an attempt to use formal mechanisms to push all citizens into ‘development’.

Hunting is a largely disapproved activity at the expense of smaller communities. Either modern African government’s view hunting by citizens as harmful to development or international communities’ frown upon citizens reclaimant of industry for tourism, both at the expense of local populations whilst western tourists are sustaining the industry.

       The Future

Earlier this year, Botswana reopened its hunting season with a license of 287 elephants. In the face of COVID-19, Safari Parks have become more important than ever in rebuilding the nation. Up until the bans, Botswana was praised as one of the notable countries in Africa where hunting worked for development and conservation. Whilst the extent of recent regulations is questionable in who they are for the benefit of, it is evident that western imposed ideologies have only harmed Botswana through their one-sided and hypocritical moral rigidity.

       “COVID-19 presents many difficulties in various forms, but we remain positive and we will be looking to our Department of Wildlife and National Parks and the ministry, for support to make 2021 the success we all desperately need”

As the impacts of climate change alter the environmental landscape, there are increasing concerns for biodiversity. There is nonetheless a need for realistic solutions and ones where conservation policy looks more like a sustainable compromise than an idealistic utopian dream. To do this, western agents must confront their position of control over how resources are used in sovereign nations. Ethical ideals are not universal or always practical, and sustainable encouragement for wildlife well-being must also include the well-being of real people in their environment.

"Either you agree or disagree with the decision... it is a policy that was taken by the government after a consultative process and [the] majority of our people supported it,"

On this note, western states must also recognise it is their own citizens who are a source of income sustaining these industries. From this position, it would do well for developed nations to engage in compromising viewpoints rather than pedestals of moral superiority. Realistic shifts away from dependencies on hunting tourism involve community aid to enable rural citizens in shifting to other industries appropriate to their territory. Developing nations and rural communities are limited by funding, however, innovation is possible through localised frameworks that work for individual communities. Historically, the CBNRM framework and therisanyo have worked in unison to manage realistic shifts for both people and the environment.

       “Botswana operators aim to reinvigorate the controlled hunting program in 2021, ensuring that communities become shareholders in the hunting wildlife economy and not just stakeholders”