“Like most range states, Zambia relies on hunting revenue for most of their conservation funding. Maintaining sustainable hunting is crucial to wildlife survival.” ~ Joe Hosmer, SCI Foundation President
“Like most range states, Zambia relies on hunting revenue for most of their conservation funding. Maintaining sustainable hunting is crucial to wildlife survival.” ~ Joe Hosmer, SCI Foundation President
The Last Word on Wildlife 
While the single-minded obsession of SCI and its members to trophy hunting as the sole solution to the conservation of the African wildlife species, I have to respect that they put their money down to back up the research and education needed to inform wildlife management through regulated hunting. It seems all the environmental community is willing to do is petition and litigate.
Excuse my grammar, I mean to say their single-minded obsession is very irritating.
Hunting is certainly not the sole solution to the conservation of African wildlife, but it is part of the overall equation… It is generating conservation dollars where they are extremely hard to come by.
Part of why these dollars are hard to come by is that the anti-trophy hunting conservation groups with international reach do not choose to become an active player in finding a compromise solution. As I read the article, what stands out is that SCI spent funds and resource bringing information and education to the Zambian government and they are at least helping fund the big cat population estimation work sought by Zambia before they make a decision on the continued hunting ban on them. While I could be a pessimist and charge that any SCI-funded research will likely be biased from the get-go to ensure favorable results, I do not see the anti-hunting environmental groups bringing a similar effort. Despite the philosophical high ground staked out by no-kill advocates, the conservation solutions to managing African wildlife are expensive and need to address the economic welfare at the tribal, on-the-ground level.