As US president Donald Trump mulls the signing into law of an
act that would restrict imports of hunting trophies from African countries, wildlife experts and animal rights groups are at odds over the economic impact and its
ultimate effect on conservation.
Named the CECIL Act, it is said to be motivated by the killing of Cecil the lion outside
Hwange National Park in 2015 in the Matabeleland North province of Zimbabwe. The
bill would place a total ban on US imports of hunting trophies from dead lions
or elephants from Zimbabwe, Zambia or Tanzania.
Cecil the lion was killed by American dentist Walter Palmer,
sparking heated debate and outrage around the world among animal rights
activists.
The US Government’s House on Natural Resources Committee has
passed the Act. Currently, CECIL, also known as the Conserving Ecosystems by
Ceasing the Importation of hunted Animal Trophies Act, awaits a vote in the US
House of Representatives.
The British government is also reportedly set to announce a
ban on trophies after decades of campaigning by animal rights lobby groups.
Last week Metro.co.uk
reported that animal welfare minister Zac Goldsmith said government would be consulting
urgently. Goldsmith also voiced disgust at hunters, including Palmer.
However, some experts in Zimbabwe fear that legislation aimed at
protecting animals would have adverse effects on conservation, as other
countries sympathetic to America would follow suit, which could in turn reduce revenue generated by the wildlife industry.
In an opinion article published in the Washington Examiner,
Fulton Upenyu Mangwanya, Director General of the Zimbabwe Parks and Wildlife
Management Authority, argued that ceasing to import hunting trophies from Zimbabwe
would not contribute to the conservation of
ecosystems.
He said Zimbabwe managed to secure over five million
hectares of land outside traditional protected areas, an achievement that was
only realised due to US$2m in big game hunting revenue, which went to over 800 000
families in rural areas.
"The CECIL Act would rob such initiatives of this
funding, eliminating incentives for local communities to participate in these
effective conservation initiatives.
"Without money from sport hunting safaris, we would be
unable to implement most of our flagship conservation plans," he wrote.