Oxford researchers have shared their findings from a study into the UK’s role in the international hunting trophy trade.
The study, led by the University of Oxford’s Department of Biology and the Oxford Martin Programme on Wildlife Trade, concluded that the previously proposed UK Hunting Trophies (Import Prohibition) Bill could cause more harm than good for the species it is intended to protect.
Currently under UK law, body parts of elephants, bears, lions, hippos and zebras are among those allowed to be brought back from hunting trips.
- Can wildlife trade ever be beneficial? A look at its positive side
- What is ivory, and is it exclusive to elephants?
Earlier this year, under a Conservative government, MPs tried to pass a law that would have banned British hunters from bringing back trophies from species protected under CITES. The bill passed through the House of Commons, but fell foul of procrastination by peers in the House of Lords. The new Labour government has committed to a similar import ban in its manifesto.
Impact on local communities
According to the study, the previously proposed UK Hunting Trophies (Import Prohibition) Bill was disproportionate in that it “failed to adequately consider the benefits of trophy hunting to local communities, particularly its role in supporting livelihoods.”
Dr Dan Challender, lead author for the study, further argued: “The analysis indicates that this bill could have a severe, even devastating, impact on marginalised rural communities and indigenous peoples who rely on legal hunting for trophies for income and employment.”
Furthermore, the study reports that over two thirds (67%) of the responses submitted to the Government’s public consultation on the hunting trophy trade were linked to lobby group campaigns.
In contrast to arguments that the bill would help protect endangered species all over the world, the study indicates that trophy hunting is not a major threat to any species imported into the UK, but does, or has the potential to, provide significant environmental and social benefits. These include protecting wildlands from conversion to agriculture; providing resources to prevent poaching and income and employment for Indigenous peoples and local communities.
The study also revealed that hunting trophies represented less than 0.1% of all UK trade in CITES-listed animal species. More animals were traded as pets in the study period than hunting trophies.
Contributing author Professor Amy Dickman said: “Assuming past trade is indicative of future imports, the argument that the bill will reduce pressure on many threatened species is unfounded. Other threats, notably unregulated hunting, poaching, and retaliatory killing, are much greater for most species imported to the UK as hunting trophies.”
In response to the study, Peter Kemple Hardy of World Animal Protection UK, said: “Trophy hunting is animal abuse. The senseless targeting of wild animals for the entertainment of wealthy tourists often causes unnecessary prolonged suffering. There are humane alternatives to provide livelihoods for communities that don't involve killing wildlife for sport."