Researchers from the Oxford Martin Programme on Wildlife Trade and the University of Oxford’s Department of Biology have reported findings from a study into the UK’s role in the international hunting trophy trade, and indicated that previously proposed legislation to regulate the trade would need significant reform.

Their analysis suggests the proposed UK Hunting Trophies (Import Prohibition) Bill that MPs voted to support last year (before a new government was elected this year) was disproportionate and may cause more harm than good to the species it was intended to protect. The new Labour government has also committed to a similar import ban in their manifesto.

The researchers’ analysis was based on data from CITES (Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) and the IUCN (International Union for Conservation of Nature) Red List of Threatened Species. The results have been published today in Conservation Science and Practice.

Their key findings, covering the period 2000-2021:

• An estimated 3,494 hunting trophies from 73 species and subspecies included under CITES were imported into the UK, from an estimated 2,549 individual animals. This equates to roughly 159 trophies each year (116 animals each year).
• This represents less than 1% of the global trade in hunting trophies from species included in CITES, estimated at 557,799 trophies for 2000-2021. The UK ranked 25 out of 183 countries importing hunting trophies for this period.
• The species with the highest number of trophy imports to the UK was the African elephant, with around 25 trophies per year (equivalent to 6 animals per year). Other top species included American black bear, hippopotamus, Chacma’s baboon, and lion.
• Around 79% of the hunting trophies imported to the UK in 2015-2021 were from countries where populations of the hunted species were stable, increasing, or abundant.
• Legal hunting for trophies was not found to be a major threat to any of the 73 species and subspecies imported to the UK, although it is likely or possibly a local threat to eight species, but this does not affect the global conservation status of the species.*
• Conversely, trophy hunting was found to provide, or have the potential to provide, significant environmental and social benefits. These included protecting wildlands from conversion to agriculture; providing resources to prevent poaching; income and employment for Indigenous peoples and local communities; provision of meat for local communities; and enhanced population growth for threatened species. Importantly, these social benefits also extended to regions where opportunities for commercial tourism are limited.

The research team also assessed the UK Government’s impact assessment of the proposed Hunting Trophies (Import Prohibition) Bill, considering the quality of analysis and areas that could be improved. They concluded that the impact assessment had failed to adequately consider the benefits of trophy hunting to local communities, particularly its role in supporting livelihoods. Furthermore, they report that over two thirds (67%) of the responses submitted to the Government’s public consultation on hunting trophy trade were linked to lobby group campaigns.

The previous UK Government’s impact assessment failed to adequately consider the likely impacts of this policy on local people outside of the UK who would incur most of the costs.

A survey commissioned by the IUCN in 2021 found that fewer than half of UK adults would support a trophy hunting ban if it would increase threats to wildlife conservation (42%) or negatively impact marginalised rural communities (39%).

The study also revealed that hunting trophies represented less than 0.1% of all UK trade in CITES-listed animal species. More animals were traded as pets in the study period than hunting trophies.

In view of these findings, the researchers propose potential alternative options for the UK to regulate the international trade in hunting trophies of species included under CITES. These include:

• Do nothing differently. The UK could continue to implement the Wildlife Trade Regulations (WTRs) and EUWTRs (Northern Ireland), ensuring that imports and exports of hunting trophies of all Annex A and six Annex B species are based on robust non-detriment findings (NDFs), to ensure that trade is sustainable, and legal acquisition findings, to ensure trade is legal.
• Implement a smart ban, analogous to a proposed ‘conservation amendment’ to the bill. This would prohibit the import of hunting trophies except in circumstances where the benefits of this hunting tangibly contribute to the conservation of the hunted species and their habitat, there is an equitable sharing of hunting revenues with local communities, an adaptive management and monitoring system is in place, and the hunting area has good governance.

Dr Dan Challender, lead author for the study, said: ‘Our study suggests that the proposed ban on importing hunting trophies to the UK is disproportionate and may harm biodiversity. Crucially, the previous UK Government’s impact assessment failed to adequately consider the likely impacts of this policy on local people outside of the UK who would incur most of the costs. The analysis indicates that this bill could have a severe, even devastating, impact on marginalised rural communities and indigenous peoples who rely on legal hunting for trophies for income and employment.’

Contributing author Professor Amy Dickman added: ‘Assuming past trade is indicative of future imports, the argument that the bill will reduce pressure on many threatened species is unfounded. Other threats, notably unregulated hunting, poaching, and retaliatory killing, are much greater for most species imported to the UK as hunting trophies.’