Is Hunting Conservation: 3 Things You Should Know

Is hunting good for the environment? Is hunting conservation? Does it preserve herds of elk and flocks of geese for future generations to enjoy?

It doesn’t really make sense if you look at hunting as a model of conservation from a shallow perspective. Anti-hunting groups use and re-use the argument that “killing animals is not saving them”. If you don’t hunt, understanding how the sport can even classify as conservation is tricky, and without statistics and historical examples, it’s near impossible to understand why hunting is good for wildlife.

Terry Anderson of the Hoover Institution, an avid outdoorsman, tells the following story:

Galana Ranch: Hunting and Conservation

“We pick up the story of Galana Ranch in 1960 when Martin Anderson ventured to the Dark Continent on his first hunt. He was lured to Africa by the sights and sounds familiar to all who have read Hemingway or Ruark. But his hunting passion was quickly directed to wildlife conservation.

In 1960, Kenyan wildlife was abundant and its politics were turbulent. The Mau Mau Rebellion signaled the end of colonial rule, leading most colonialists to ask one another, “Have you sold your land yet?” As a retired Marine, lawyer, and entrepreneur, however, Anderson saw Kenya’ s challenges as an opportunity.

Having whetted his appetite by investing in a 1,500-acre farm, Anderson took a giant leap into sustainable wildlife conservation when he bid on and won a 46-year lease on the 1.6 million acre Galana Ranch on the border with Tsavo East National Park.

A map of Galana Ranch, a case study for hunting conservation, and Kenya. — A map of Galana Ranch.

As an astute businessman, financing the $100,000 winning bid and finding local management partners was not a problem. But Anderson had to ask himself. ‘Was developing this virgin land the right thing to do? Would we destroy it for the elephant and the Waliangulu bushmen?’ Ultimately, he pursued a strategy which incorporated cattle ranching and hunting so as to generate income and preserve the conservation values.

Anderson and his partners developed pipelines, water points, roads, airstrips, and lodges, all of which contributed to the financial and conservation bottom lines. They generated revenues from 16,000 cattle and from hunting every species from the big five—rhino, elephants, Cape buffalo, lion, and leopard—to the smallest duikers. Wherever possible, they employed native Kenyans in their cattle and wildlife operations.

African trophy hunting and the question is hunting good for the environment — African Lions, similar to the one above helped fund hunting and conservation efforts on Galana Ranch.

One of the first management challenges on Galana was to find a way to reduce elephant hunting by bushmen. Although they hunted only with poison-tipped arrows launched from wooden longbows with 100 pound draw weights and only for meat (not ivory), the bushmen were so proficient that they were decimating the Dabassa elephant herd, which roamed Galana and Tsavo East. Anderson reported that one search “between the Galana and Tana Rivers, discovered the carcasses of about 900 elephants,” including “352 tusks, weighting more than 6,500 pounds.” Rather than trying to force them to stop killing elephants, Anderson incorporated the Waliangulu into his elephant management program, allowing them to cull elephants on a sustained yield basis.

For ten years, Galana made profits from safari hunting based on sound conservation principles. Anderson’s success gives meaning to the old rancher adage, ‘If it pays, it stays.’”

Galana Ranch and The Anti-Hunting Movement

“Unfortunately, Anderson and the other Kenyan hunter-conservationists ultimately lost out to so-called animal “welfare” activists. In May of 1977, anti-hunters succeeded in banning all ‘legal’ hunting in Kenya. Without hunting, wildlife on Galana ceased being an asset. Hunting had provided a major source of revenue for sustainable, profitable, private conservation. Thanks to the wildlife activists, though, there were no revenues and no hunters or guides in the field to police against poaching. Not surprisingly, poachers slaughtered more than 5,000 of the 6,000 elephants Anderson and his partners had conserved.

Perhaps more importantly, hunting provided native people with incomes and with meat, giving them an incentive to be part of the conservation effort. With wildlife all but gone, the government proposed in 2013 to put 1.2 million acres of the original ranch under irrigation, a project that will not be sustainable.”

#1: Hunting Provides Huge Sums Of Cash For Conservation

If we want to begin understanding why hunting is good for the environment, we must first realize that hunting provides large amounts of revenue for wildlife conservation programs.

Hunting produced necessary revenue for the protection of Galana Ranch’s wildlife. It paid for guides in the field and and for the undeveloped pieces of land.

If we shift our focus from Africa to America, you’ll see that hunting generates 60% of the revenue used in the conservation of wildlife and wilderness areas.

In 1934 the Duck Stamp Act was passed, requiring waterfowl hunters to purchase a “duck stamp” before hunting. The sale of duck stamps has contributed over $850 million to the preservation of American wetlands and waterfowl. And in 1937, congress passed the Pittsman-Robertson Act, putting an 11 percent excise tax on firearms, ammunition, and similar items. The act has provided over $14 billion to state fish and wildlife agencies, funding countless conservation projects.

A duck stamp with Mallard ducks, which is a fundamental part of wetland hunting conservation — The 2018-2019 duck stamp.

Many anti-hunting groups try to discredit this enormous amount of cash with the fact that eco-tourism (hikers, photographers, etc.) contribute far more to the American economy than hunters.

However, revenue from such activities has a hard time reaching wildlife and wilderness management efforts.

“Vermont’s fish and wildlife department, which manages more than 25,000 species and nearly 2,000 native plants, is cautioning that even though the state leads the nation in wildlife viewing, that activity “provides no significant revenue stream to the department that would allow for the management of the resources viewed.'” (NPR).

If we turn back to Africa, the Tanzanian Wildlife Division received 60% of its funding for 2006 from hunting , which netted only $2 million that year, a fraction of the $500 million eco-tourism giant.

A chart showing the percentages of funding for wildlife conservation programs. — A chart showing different funding sources for wildlife conservation in Idaho.

#2: Hunting Helps Bolster Wildlife Populations

Hunting pays, a lot, but killing animals is still killing animals. Doesn’t this lower wildlife populations?

Well, no. Despite anti-hunting groups’ claims, wildlife populations have exploded due to the efforts of wildlife biologists using hunting as a conservation tool.

In the early 1900’s the North American Model of Wildlife Conservation was created, a set of wildlife management principles. It eliminated “wild-game” markets where venison and other wildlife products were sold, created seasons and limits on the amount of game to be hunted, and bore the creation of scientific wildlife management.

This model is still in effect today with seasons and harvest limits set in place to either stabilize or increase wildlife populations.

Elk have rebounded from a population of 41,000 in 1907 to over 1 million today.

Duck counts have skyrocketed to 44 million and wild turkeys are now numbered at over 7 million compared to 100,000 in 1900.

12,000 pronghorn antelope roamed the plains in 1950. Today there are over 1.1 million.

An antelope on the plains. — Due to hunting and conservation there are over 1.1 million antelope today.

And let’s not forget that whitetail deer populations have exploded from 500,000 to 32 million in 100 years.

Incredible right? This is largely due to scientific wildlife management funded by hunters. Tags, quotas, and limits are imposed to prevent over-hunting. Wildlife biologists use hunting as a tool to ensure that the growing numbers of one species doesn’t overrun another and to prevent game from destroying the crops and livestock of private landowners.

And although this isn’t a perfect system, biologists are learning new and better management techniques every day.

#3: Hunters Report Wildlife Problems

Perhaps one of the most fundamental elements of why hunting is good for the environment is… hunters. Hunters, although often portrayed by anti-hunting groups as hell-bent on the destruction of certain species, are very conscientious of the well being of wild game and their future.

Just as you read in the story of Galana Ranch, hunters and guides in the field were a major deterrent for poachers. Poachers often spend most of their time in rural, far off wilderness areas. Guess who else spend most of their time in these places?

Hunters.

People who play it by the rules, who are concerned about wildlife numbers, and who would be glad to report a poacher.

While shed hunting on Utah’s famous Antelope Island, Fish and Game officials asked us to report on any bighorn sheep we found in the area. The sheep herd had contracted a deadly lung disease, and were slowly dying off (you can read more about this story here.)

Bighorn sheep in the rocks on Antelope Island — Hunters were tasked with finding Bighorn Sheep on Antelope Island.

Outdoorsman had become their extended eyes and ears, counting bighorn sheep and helping with conservation efforts.

Around the world, hunters are tools that the government can use to report any issues or strange activities. No other group of people spends more time deep in the wilderness, away from trails and roads, and closer to wildlife.