Upcoming IUCN SULi webinar to discuss a totally unbiased trophy hunting project
It won’t be pro-trophy hunting, just anti-anti-trophy hunting.
I previously wrote about how IUCN SULi and Oxford University partnered on a project called Exploring the role of hunting, particularly trophy hunting, in conservation and wildlife management: Supporting conservation decision-making through a comprehensive, cutting-edge & independent evidence assessment that “intends to produce an IUCN-published “situation analysis” which will focus on trophy hunting in Africa set in a wider context of wildlife harvesting globally.”
My biggest concern was that the project was reframing trophy hunting as a ‘harvesting’ activity. ‘Harvesting’ has been used before by the hunting community to rebrand hunting in a more positive light, but that word choice wasn’t something we typically saw in relation to trophy hunting.
IUCN SULi Vice-Chair Shane Mahoney owns a private company that promotes wildlife ‘harvesting.’ Mahoney is running the Wild Harvest Initiative which he said is “not a project; it is a narrative-changing program.”
Christopher Comer of Safari Club International Foundation and IUCN SULi called the Wild Harvest Initiative a “hunter advocacy project.” The project is funded by the trophy hunting industry and supported by IUCN SULi.
[Read more about this “hunter advocacy program” here.]
And today we have an update on the IUCN SULi and Oxford University project to share:
IUCN SULi is hosting a webinar on September 21, 2022 called Tackling the Thorny Issue of Trophy Hunting. The tagline for the webinar is: “An introduction to the IUCN situation analysis on the contribution of hunting to wildlife conservation and management.”
Not present on the flyer is a message from IUCN SULi Chair Dilys Roe.
In the message, Roe stated that the “key objective of this initiative was to improve the available evidence-base to understand the degree to which hunting contributes to the conservation of species and habitats and to local livelihoods.” I personally think the key objective was to reframe trophy hunting in a more positive light by leveraging the ‘harvesting’ narrative – but that’s just me.
Additionally, Roe noted that “with the public debates and campaign on hunting – particularly trophy hunting – persisting and escalating in their intensity and frequency over social media, and the use of contested figures and facts to mislead and misinform, the importance of this work has remained critical and urgent.”
I agree, this is important work. As such, I’m sure IUCN SULi will discuss the multimillion-dollar disinformation campaign that the trophy hunting industry was running on social media.
But let’s be honest, they won’t touch that disinformation campaign. I’ll happily apologize if IUCN SULi does actually criticize the trophy hunting industry’s disinformation and if they make a clear distinction between that and the misinformation from anti-trophy hunting groups.
I’d also like IUCN SULi members to write about the trophy hunting industry’s blatant deception in their op-eds about misinformation, but I’m not holding my breath.
There will be opportunities to question the project leaders Roe and Amy Dickman. Here are a few questions I’d like someone to ask Dickman:
Do you think you are qualified to be a leader of a project evaluating trophy hunting given your potential conflicts of interest?
Can I even ask that question or will you threaten legal action against me like you’ve done to others? (Maybe ask this first?)
Can someone who is considered a celebrity in the trophy hunting industry give an honest review of that industry?
Do you actually know how to spot misinformation? Jared Kukura pointed out very egregious disinformation to you and you told him that you weren’t sure about it.
Do you feel that your picture and quotes being used for a disinformation campaign prepared you for a project that intends to battle misinformation?
How can you consider trophy hunting a conservation tool if IUCN SULi needs to undertake a project to determine the extent to which trophy hunting contributes to conservation? Shouldn’t your opinion be based on evidence that is already available?
Is there a difference between being pro-trophy hunting and anti-anti-trophy hunting? Asking for a friend.
Make sure you subscribe if you want to keep getting updates about our friends at IUCN SULi!