How much does hunting contribute to African economies?

[willie_gunn]

Apologies if this has been posted before, but I thought it actually made for interesting reading.

FACTSHEET: How much does hunting contribute to African economies? - Africa Check

 

[JAYB]

An interesting read Dom. It would be interesting to see what percentage of income in the less touristy areas is derived from hunting.

John

 

[TikkaFan]

Apologies if this has been posted before, but I thought it actually made for interesting reading.

FACTSHEET: How much does hunting contribute to African economies? - Africa Check

I think that should be listed as an opinion sheet as opposed to a fact sheet , I know some PH`s ask for their fees to be paid in USD into offshore accounts but with the state of the Rand I`m not surprised, I think you can only safely assume that some of the money goes into local economies and local conservation , where license fees the PH`s pay go is another can of worms.

 

[willie_gunn]

I think that should be listed as an opinion sheet as opposed to a fact sheet , I know some PH`s ask for their fees to be paid in USD into offshore accounts but with the state of the Rand I`m not surprised, I think you can only safely assume that some of the money goes into local economies and local conservation , where license fees the PH`s pay go is another can of worms.

Agreed.

The revenue that flows in from hunting goes into several "buckets" as I understand it; the PH's fee, the outfitters fee, the government/regulatory licenses or permits, taxidermy fees & services, spending in shops/hotels/etc.

I also thought it interesting (though not necessarily surprising) that the report identified that the average spend was higher for hunters and the geographical spend more diverse than with regular wildlife tourists - a point that often gets neglected by those who suggest hunting is a poor substitute for other tourism.

Having been to ZA last November I can quite understand why being paid offshore in USD would be attractive!

 

[Kano383]

Here are some figures. Let's talk about a hunting season with twenty buffalo safaris in Uganda, at average rates, prices, and animals bags.

Licenses, permits, daily fees, share on Trophy Fees, etc. going to the Government: $46,500

Daily Fees going to the Local Government: $10,000

Share on Trophy Fees going directly to the local community, used for community projects and infrastructure (dispensaries, schools, boreholes, sanitation, etc.): $52,500

Full time jobs created in the hunting area: 15-20

Casual jobs created: 30-50 for durations of 2 weeks to 3 months each

Amount spent in country, besides the above: upwards of $200,000


This is from 20-25 clients in one year.

How many tourists do you think you'd need, to bring in the same amount? What would be the impact of such a number of tourists on a wild area, in terms of vehicles, roads, lodges, waste, disturbance to environment and animals, disturbance to local population, cultural clash, etc, etc? Not saying that tourism is not necessary for the economy, just giving a perspective - because, trust me, the say "Shoot only pictures, take only memories" is simplistic bullcrap that complacently forgets one and a half million small and big things...

For reference, the Local Government in the area where I operate has a population of 15-20,000 people, an 80-90% rate of unemployement, and a yearly budget of $60,000 to $80,000.

 

[willie_gunn]

Thanks for those figures - it is great to get something more realistic rather than just anecdotal.

It's interesting that, here in the UK, SNH recognise the value of field sports tourism over general wildlife tourism: http://www.snh.gov.uk/docs/B720765.pdf

Clearly things are on a different scale in Africa, but I get the feeling that there's a very strong story to be told here. I just wonder who should be telling it?

 

[Heym SR20]

One of the real key benefits are the anti poaching activities funded by most safari businesses. Conservation and hunting going hand in hand. Net effect is that marginal land is again productive and valuable with higher levels of game. Most hunters are interested in old mature animals that are past breeding age so their ongoing by value to the animal population in terms of breeding etc will be limited, but value to the local economy is huge. Also most game meat remains in the local community and is a hugely important source of protein. A healthy and productive game population is often far more valuable to the local people, and much better than being removed from the land to make way for wide scale land clearance and agriculture funded by the Chinese - the latter have bought up millions of acres of central Africa to produce rice, wheat and maize.

 

[Mungo]

There is a big (and very hard to measure) gap between the theoretical value and the actual value.

In theory, hunting generates a very substantial income in areas with little or no alternative. However, a large proportion of the money never goes anywhere near the communities on the ground. The bulk of the fees paid to the outfitter by the client tend to remain in offshore accounts. And the bulk of the licence fees paid by the outfitter to the various levels of government...well, good luck working out where they go.

To some extent, Botswana, Namibia and SA are exceptions. But with the rest of Africa, hunting is no more or less valuable than any other Western conceit at makin genuine differences on the ground.

 

[Heym SR20]

An interesting thread from another forum showing the direct impact of the hunting $ on wildlife. Appreciate the this report on Anti Poaching activities is directed at its supporters, and also appreciate that a lot of the funds involved in hunting will remain offshore, and given the corruption who blames them.

Dande Anti Poaching Unit Newsletter - Topic

 

[Kano383]

There is a big (and very hard to measure) gap between the theoretical value and the actual value.In theory, hunting generates a very substantial income in areas with little or no alternative. However, a large proportion of the money never goes anywhere near the communities on the ground. The bulk of the fees paid to the outfitter by the client tend to remain in offshore accounts. And the bulk of the licence fees paid by the outfitter to the various levels of government...well, good luck working out where they go. To some extent, Botswana, Namibia and SA are exceptions. But with the rest of Africa, hunting is no more or less valuable than any other Western conceit at making genuine differences on the ground.

Sorry, I wanted to reply to this long ago, but with the hunting season on, I tend to spend more time in the bush than firing away on a keyboard…

1) “The bulk of the money paid to the outfitter remains in offshore accounts”. Well, and how exactly do we pay for fuel, vehicles, salaries, rent, repairs, government fees, medical fees, pension funds, taxes, food, electricity, anti-poaching patrols, game counts, research, monitoring, building camps, maintaining camps, charter aircraft, insurance, firearms permits, “voluntary donations”, school fees, family expenses, dog food, etc., etc.? Kindly enlighten me.

2) “A large proportion of the money never goes anywhere near the communities on the ground”. I won’t talk about other countries, but in Uganda, 75% of the Trophy Fees goes directly to the landowners/local community Associations. It is not paid to some Government bottomless account, but directly to the recipients, by the outfitters. And believe me, the locals are very good at knowing exactly how many animals have been hunted, and what is the fee for each…

3) The license fees paid to various Government Offices… Well, they go to the Wildlife Authority and Government coffers. Do you really know where the money you pay to your own Government ends up? And if you happen to know, are you really happy with what they do with it?

4) “But with the rest of Africa, hunting is no more or less valuable than any other Western conceit at making genuine differences on the ground.” I beg to disagree. Whereas various NGOs, International Aid Programs, and sundry Western do-gooder Clubs are an exercise in uselessness and wanton spending on white elephant chases, the vast majority of hunting outfits are run locally, by people who live full time in the country, and contribute directly to the local economy on par with any other legitimate business. In addition, the only people who really try to make a realistic and sustainable difference on the ground in matters of wildlife conservation, are these same hunting outfitters and wildlife managers.