Beef has made a lot of headlines over the past year. First slaughterhouses really struggled during the early days of COVID—they had shutdowns, slaughtered massive numbers of animals, and saw terrible health outcomes for their workers. More recently,
Eye-opening episode. I think many of us, myself included, are in denial about the linkage between environmentalism and animal cruelty. We view it as two separate issues. This denial stems from selfishness and also an “out of sight, out of mind” mentality. Perhaps it will come into focus in a later phase, when fossil fuels are more under control, but you are right to highlight it now. Btw, do you know about Muun Chi (Manette)?
Of your possible reasons why environmentalists don’t prioritize animal welfare, the first is most accurate. Strategy and focus. As you pointed out in a previous column about Bezos Earth Fund, most working environmentalists are simply too underpaid and overworked to take on one-more-thing.
In the southern part of the African continent where I live and work, there isn’t, thankfully, much factory farming. There also isn’t much access to plant-based meat substitutes (mainly available to the elite, and not very tasty). Over 50% of fruits and vegetables are imported from South Africa. Despite a large fishing industry, red meat is king.
There are passionate people here who work in animal welfare, run no-kill shelters, etc. I admire and support them and there is some professional overlap between their work and mine in conservation. The big moral problem we do have is trophy hunting. What to do about it?
The conservation world has long been captured by trophy hunting interests, from the Brit aristos to Teddy Roosevelt, who sought to ‘conserve’ game so there would always be plenty animals for them to shoot. Do you know where the term ‘game’ comes from? Trophy hunting. The great ‘game’ of killing wild animals.
The same thinking rules conservation in Africa today, a hangover from the ‘Great White Hunter’ days. The Black post-colonial government officials now in charge of conservation were thoroughly indoctrinated by the older white men who trained them decades ago. The white men are now retired, or running safari companies and hunting farms, and they still like to trophy hunt. They have a cadre of pro-hunting scientists on their payroll, mouthpieces like their clients the wealthy Dallas Safari Club, the ear of political figures who are often also on the payroll, one way or another. All the larger conservation NGO’s in Africa (some generously supported by TNC) back ‘conservation hunting’ if only by not speaking against it. Most of the world’s major conservation NGO’s that work in Africa support ‘conservation hunting’, although I hear Sir Ranulph Fiennes has finally shamed WWF to stop endorsing trophy hunting. But in general, if you have a small NGO, as do I, and you openly express distaste for trophy hunting, you will be labeled a ‘bunny hugger’, to your face or behind your back, and doors will close.
A high-profile conservationist here begins his argument like this, “I don’t hunt. In fact I’ve been a vegetarian for 45 years. But I believe hunting is good, indeed necessary, for conservation in Africa.” Pro-hunting interests usually go on to qualify that as, ‘sustainable, well-managed, ethical’ styles of hunting, all of which are almost impossible to achieve in Africa because of corruption on both sides of the deal. They explain how urbanized westerners just don’t understand real conservation in Africa, etc. etc… They have densely argued justifications, backed by pro-hunting-science. They have graphs and charts, white papers and reports. It’s exhausting to try and counter their well-organized, well-financed media army.
Unlike the gentleman quoted above, I eat animal protein, although I don’t have a meat-centered diet. I believe there are too many cattle taking up space and resources on our planet. On our reserve, I’ve personally observed the huge difference between how wild herbivores impact the grass, soil and water table (very little), compared to cattle (catastrophic). I grew up in a deer hunting family in the US although I haven’t hunted in years. I don’t believe in sport hunting, or killing anything you don’t personally eat, certainly not elephants, rhinos or the big cats. None of my inconvenient details matter to the pro-trophy hunting side.
It doesn’t matter how finely tuned your arguments are for conservation that doesn’t involve ‘utilization’ of all wildlife because bunny huggers are not taken seriously. I’m not willing to take on this hostile group of men alone; it’s too draining and yes, we underfunded, over-worked conservationists do have to focus. Our NGO's strategy is to restore unfenced, non-hunting habitat for wildlife at a landscape level, and make our values known by example. We are too small to approach foundations for support; often, larger NGO’s serve as our funders by redistributing resources from foundations. What all funders could do is structure some grants to have a strict non-hunting criteria, to offset all the dollars that flow to hunting interests, one way or the other. They could also do more to support the purchase of deed-restricted land for non-hunting reserves.
What the public must do (it’s estimated that over 90% find trophy hunting repugnant) and not leave to the ‘environmentalists’ is rise up and demand trophy hunting is ended.
I’d like to see an alternative to hunting sooner, rather than later. To me that looks like payments for ecosystem services like carbon sequestration in our grasslands, biodiversity credits/offsets coming from the developed world to places like Africa where we struggle for funds. We won’t get financial support from the government; there isn’t much there and we don’t sit at the table.
It’s lucrative to build over-lit luxury lodges in the oldest desert on earth with multiple swimming pools, draining the precious water table, destroying the dark night sky.
But to be paid to not develop our land? To not graze, not fence, not burn, not hunt, not cut down endemic trees to make charcoal? There are many people here who believe in the above but are forced to go against their values to simply survive. We can now monitor compliance for agreements like these by satellite, internet-connected weather stations, and take meetings via Zoom. There’s never been a better time to try new alternatives and move away from conservation funded by hunting.
Thank you for this insightful piece, Mark. I hope there will come a day when we each can see ourselves as one with nature. When we can honor and respect our precious Earth and her many gifts, she is able to provide us with plants that heal, and animals that keep our soils nourished. Humans can become part of the solution, instead of the problem, in the workings of a complex and beautiful cycle of nature. May we learn from our mistakes and take action to replenish our soils by honoring our animals. Thank you for your efforts Mark!
Eye-opening episode. I think many of us, myself included, are in denial about the linkage between environmentalism and animal cruelty. We view it as two separate issues. This denial stems from selfishness and also an “out of sight, out of mind” mentality. Perhaps it will come into focus in a later phase, when fossil fuels are more under control, but you are right to highlight it now. Btw, do you know about Muun Chi (Manette)?
Of your possible reasons why environmentalists don’t prioritize animal welfare, the first is most accurate. Strategy and focus. As you pointed out in a previous column about Bezos Earth Fund, most working environmentalists are simply too underpaid and overworked to take on one-more-thing.
In the southern part of the African continent where I live and work, there isn’t, thankfully, much factory farming. There also isn’t much access to plant-based meat substitutes (mainly available to the elite, and not very tasty). Over 50% of fruits and vegetables are imported from South Africa. Despite a large fishing industry, red meat is king.
There are passionate people here who work in animal welfare, run no-kill shelters, etc. I admire and support them and there is some professional overlap between their work and mine in conservation. The big moral problem we do have is trophy hunting. What to do about it?
The conservation world has long been captured by trophy hunting interests, from the Brit aristos to Teddy Roosevelt, who sought to ‘conserve’ game so there would always be plenty animals for them to shoot. Do you know where the term ‘game’ comes from? Trophy hunting. The great ‘game’ of killing wild animals.
The same thinking rules conservation in Africa today, a hangover from the ‘Great White Hunter’ days. The Black post-colonial government officials now in charge of conservation were thoroughly indoctrinated by the older white men who trained them decades ago. The white men are now retired, or running safari companies and hunting farms, and they still like to trophy hunt. They have a cadre of pro-hunting scientists on their payroll, mouthpieces like their clients the wealthy Dallas Safari Club, the ear of political figures who are often also on the payroll, one way or another. All the larger conservation NGO’s in Africa (some generously supported by TNC) back ‘conservation hunting’ if only by not speaking against it. Most of the world’s major conservation NGO’s that work in Africa support ‘conservation hunting’, although I hear Sir Ranulph Fiennes has finally shamed WWF to stop endorsing trophy hunting. But in general, if you have a small NGO, as do I, and you openly express distaste for trophy hunting, you will be labeled a ‘bunny hugger’, to your face or behind your back, and doors will close.
A high-profile conservationist here begins his argument like this, “I don’t hunt. In fact I’ve been a vegetarian for 45 years. But I believe hunting is good, indeed necessary, for conservation in Africa.” Pro-hunting interests usually go on to qualify that as, ‘sustainable, well-managed, ethical’ styles of hunting, all of which are almost impossible to achieve in Africa because of corruption on both sides of the deal. They explain how urbanized westerners just don’t understand real conservation in Africa, etc. etc… They have densely argued justifications, backed by pro-hunting-science. They have graphs and charts, white papers and reports. It’s exhausting to try and counter their well-organized, well-financed media army.
Unlike the gentleman quoted above, I eat animal protein, although I don’t have a meat-centered diet. I believe there are too many cattle taking up space and resources on our planet. On our reserve, I’ve personally observed the huge difference between how wild herbivores impact the grass, soil and water table (very little), compared to cattle (catastrophic). I grew up in a deer hunting family in the US although I haven’t hunted in years. I don’t believe in sport hunting, or killing anything you don’t personally eat, certainly not elephants, rhinos or the big cats. None of my inconvenient details matter to the pro-trophy hunting side.
It doesn’t matter how finely tuned your arguments are for conservation that doesn’t involve ‘utilization’ of all wildlife because bunny huggers are not taken seriously. I’m not willing to take on this hostile group of men alone; it’s too draining and yes, we underfunded, over-worked conservationists do have to focus. Our NGO's strategy is to restore unfenced, non-hunting habitat for wildlife at a landscape level, and make our values known by example. We are too small to approach foundations for support; often, larger NGO’s serve as our funders by redistributing resources from foundations. What all funders could do is structure some grants to have a strict non-hunting criteria, to offset all the dollars that flow to hunting interests, one way or the other. They could also do more to support the purchase of deed-restricted land for non-hunting reserves.
What the public must do (it’s estimated that over 90% find trophy hunting repugnant) and not leave to the ‘environmentalists’ is rise up and demand trophy hunting is ended.
I’d like to see an alternative to hunting sooner, rather than later. To me that looks like payments for ecosystem services like carbon sequestration in our grasslands, biodiversity credits/offsets coming from the developed world to places like Africa where we struggle for funds. We won’t get financial support from the government; there isn’t much there and we don’t sit at the table.
It’s lucrative to build over-lit luxury lodges in the oldest desert on earth with multiple swimming pools, draining the precious water table, destroying the dark night sky.
But to be paid to not develop our land? To not graze, not fence, not burn, not hunt, not cut down endemic trees to make charcoal? There are many people here who believe in the above but are forced to go against their values to simply survive. We can now monitor compliance for agreements like these by satellite, internet-connected weather stations, and take meetings via Zoom. There’s never been a better time to try new alternatives and move away from conservation funded by hunting.
Excellent piece. Thank you.
Thank you for this insightful piece, Mark. I hope there will come a day when we each can see ourselves as one with nature. When we can honor and respect our precious Earth and her many gifts, she is able to provide us with plants that heal, and animals that keep our soils nourished. Humans can become part of the solution, instead of the problem, in the workings of a complex and beautiful cycle of nature. May we learn from our mistakes and take action to replenish our soils by honoring our animals. Thank you for your efforts Mark!