Using Trophy Hunting to Save Wildlife Foraging Resources: A Case Study from Moyowosi-Kigosi Game Reserves, Tanzania

Abstract

Globally, the role of trophy hunting in wildlife conservation has been a topic of much debate. While various studies have focused on the financial contribution of trophy hunting towards wildlife conservation, little is known about whether hunting activities can protect wildlife forage resources. We examined the effect of illegal livestock grazing on wildlife habitat in operational and non-operational wildlife hunting blocks in Moyowosi-Kigosi Game Reserves (MKGR), Tanzania. We assessed whether the physical presence of hunting activities lowered illegal grazing and, thus, led to higher vegetation quality. We compared 324 samples of above-ground biomass (AGB) and grass cover between control (0.0007 cattle ha−1), moderately (0.02 cattle ha−1), and intensively (0.05 to 0.1 cattle ha−1) grazed hunting blocks. Likewise, we assessed soil infiltration, soil penetration, soil organic carbon (SOC), and soil Nitrogen, Phosphorus, and Potassium (N-P-K) across grazing intensity. Illegal grazing decreased AGB by 55%, grass cover by 36%, soil penetration by 46%, and infiltration rate by 63% compared to the control blocks. Illegal grazing further lowered SOC by 28% (F2,33 = 8, p < 0.002) but increased soil N by 50% (F2,33 = 32.2, p < 0.001) and soil K by 56% (H (2) = 23.9, p < 0.001), while soil P remained stable. We further examined if Hunting Company (HC) complements anti-poaching efforts in the Game Reserves (GR). We found that HC contributes an average of 347 worker-days−1 for patrol efforts, which is 49% more than the patrol efforts conducted by the GR. However, patrol success is higher for GR than HC (F1,21 = 116, p < 0.001), due to constant surveillance by HC, illegal herders avoided invading their hunting blocks. We conclude that illegal grazing severely reduced vegetation and soil quality in MKGR. We further claim that trophy hunting contributes directly to wildlife habitat preservation by deploying constant surveillance and preventing illegal grazing. We propose maintaining trophy hunting as an essential ecological tool in wildlife conservation.

Conservation Status of the African Buffalo: A Continent-Wide Assessment

“…On the positive side, (i) not only is Tanzania the only country holding single populations of over 50,000 buffalo, but there are three of these populations in the country; and (ii) several ecosystems show positive trends with growing buffalo populations, for example Serengeti Ecosystem. On a more worrying side, the overall national trend of buffalo is on the decrease due to (i) severe encroachment by livestock tending to replace buffalo in several ecosystems (Prins, 1992;Musika et al, 2021Musika et al, , 2022Prins and De Jong, 2022) and (ii) steady agricultural expansion and associated settlements.…”

Public perceptions of trophy hunting are pragmatic, not dogmatic

“…For example, UK newspapers frequently assert that trophy hunters kill iconic animals and contribute to biodiversity decline, but seldom mention evidence that well-regulated, community-led trophy hunting can generate sustainable direct or indirect benefits for wildlife populations and for people who live in rural areas where livelihood options can be limited [13]. Documented benefits from well-regulated trophy hunting include employment in hunting and related industries, meat from hunted animals, and revenues that can defray substantial costs associated with wildlife conservation and support economic development, for example through investments in infrastructure, healthcare and education [14,[19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28].…”

Impact of illegal livestock grazing on the socio-ecologica role of trophy hunting: the case of Moyowosi Kigosi game reserve, Tanzania

“…However, the increasing illegal grazing inside MKGR affects forage resources for wildlife (Musika et al, 2021b). Also this study found there is high dietary overlap between buffalo and livestock (Kimuyu et al, 2017) warned that even a slight partial dietary overlap will affect the spatial use of wildlife.…”

“…Studies show that grazing reduces grass cover (Lu et al, 2017;Musika et al, 2022;Rahmanian et al, 2019), grass biomass (Shen et al, 2019), causes higher soil bulk density which in turn affects soil infiltration and penetration capacity (Musika et al, 2022;Shen et al, 2019). Grass cover protects soil, their roots increases soil aeration, their decomposition increases organic matter (Rahmanian et al, 2019), it reduces bulk density and enhances soil infiltration (Haruna et al, 2018).…”

“…It is noteworthy that when livestock grazes intensively they reduce forage availability to wild herbivores and force them to move to a less preferred forage (Liu & Jiang, 2004;Musika et al, 2022). This is particularly the case when the number of domestic animals is larger than that of wild herbivores (Liu & Jiang 2004).…”