Reply #2: Abundant wildlife when regulated hunting was practiced [View All]

[NickB79]

As the article stated, before the land redistribution, most of this land was used for safari hunting. The government regulated how many animals could be hunted each year, and wildlife flourished. When the land was confiscated from those running the safaris and game preserves, all hell broke lose as game was poached and killed far in excess of any safari hunt.

"Hunting and tourism once pumped millions of dollars into Zimbabwe's economy, sustaining wildlife management programmes on millions of acres of private scrubland too arid or rocky for commercial farming, but ideal for photographic safaris and big-game hunts."

"The quotas not only conserved wildlife populations but ensured profit for both the conservancies and the Zimbabwean government by putting a premium on hunting rights.

Settlers now trap animals indiscriminately, both for their own food and for a growing market in so-called bush meat."

Like it or not, wildlife was FAR better off when the land was managed by those running the safaris than it is now. Regulated hunting was beneficial to the people of the area AND the wildlife, just as many safari groups have claimed. Very sad story.