A complex issue

The debate about hunting as a tool in conservation contains an inherent paradox. For many, it seems contradictory that the act of harvesting wild animals can contribute to preserving them and their habitats. Yet, in several parts of the world, hunting has become an integral part of modern wildlife conservation.

In southern Africa, the transition from traditional livestock farming to wildlife management and hunting tourism has demonstrated how hunting can create economic value in living wildlife populations. When land is managed for wildlife rather than livestock, it allows for greater biodiversity, and income from hunting can fund habitat protection, monitoring, and anti-poaching efforts. At the same time, local communities gain a direct economic incentive to conserve nature.

In other parts of the world, however, the situation is far more complex. In large areas of West and Central Africa, bushmeat hunting is a central component of both food security and the local economy. Here, hunting is rarely regulated and affects wildlife across all age groups and population levels. The result can be so-called “empty forests,” where biodiversity is severely reduced even though the forest itself remains intact.

This creates a difficult balance, as reducing overexploitation requires alternatives to bushmeat—often in the form of regulated hunting tourism that can generate income. However, such models presuppose the existence of robust wildlife populations capable of sustaining a sustainable level of use.

At the same time, financing plays a crucial role. Many projects depend on donations and temporary funding schemes, which can be vital in the initial phases but rarely ensure long-term stability without a locally anchored economic foundation.

Hunting as a tool for nature and wildlife conservation is, in some places, a complex matter that requires hard, persistent work—and, above all, that it is approached in the right way.