Researcher Wants to Find “Sustainable Bushmeat”
Category: Forests, bushmeat, poaching, wildlife trade | Date: Nov 17 2008 | By: Maina
A US geneticist from the University of Arizona is planning to use DNA testing to study the roaring bushmeat trade in west Africa with a view of identifying “species that can be harvested sustainably”.
According to a report on KTar.com, the geneticist, Hans-Werner Herrmann, will analyze the bushmeat at village markets, track how it got there and study how the information could be used to better manage affected wildlife populations. He hopes that finding species that can be hunted sustainably will curtail poaching and halt wildlife decimation particularly in African forests.
According to Herrmann, rural Africans are driven into bushmeat hunting and trade by extreme poverty and he cannot just say it is bad to hunt without answering the poverty question.
Roughly 1 million tonnes of bushmeat are harvested in the badly ravaged African forests. a CIFOR report that Dr Richard Leakey felt had erred in its recommendations says that 80% of proteins and fats in rural Africans’ diets come from bushmeat. This is a big problem and solutions to bushmeat hunting need to be found before all wildlife becomes extinct.
The study will involve African researchers in Cameroon taking DNA samples from bushmeat in the markets, and sending it to Arizona for analysis and identification. They will then track how the meat got to the market and study how the information can be used to help in management of the affected wildlife populations.
How useful this study will be is subject to debate. Particularly, when they find wildlife species that they perceive to be “bushmeat viable”, does it mean that they will recommend legalization of bushmeat hunting? Perhaps we need this research to prove that there is no way bushmeat can be harvested sustainably.
There are three things that make sustainable hunting virtualy impossible: one, there is not enough wildlife, two, there are too many humans on the planet, and three, our African governments have problems implementing anti-poaching legislation. To me, these are the fundamental questions: not whether wildlife can be harvested sustainably.
Perhaps the researchers - who by the way have applied for a $1-million from the United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) for the study - should use these funds to find out how we can prevent the malignant human population growth from overrunning the planet and all wild things that live in it. Better still, these funds could be used to find alternatives sources of protein and income (poverty reduction) for the rural poor in Africa. Alternatives that are not bushmeat.
For wildlife populations to recover, and to avoid imminent mass extinctions, all manner of wildlife trade needs to be stopped - at the very least, as a precaution. We don’t really understand wildlife population dynamics that well to sustainably use it. We haven’t yet fathomed the complex interaction between humans and wildlife to say that we are in control of hunting and trade.
We know a few things though. One, bushmeat hunting has already resulted in the empty forest syndrome, where the forest vegetation is relatively intact but no wild animals live there. Two, governments have good legislation intended to control bushmeat poaching but implementation is weak. Three, losing our wildlife is not good for the planet.
With these truths in mind, perhaps what we need is to stop all human-centric arguments that perpetuate eating of wildlife and start focusing on finding ways to improve wildlife’s welfare.
Tags: Africa, bushmeat, CIFOR, DNA, extinction, forest, hunting, richard leakey, UNEP, University of Arizona, wildlife, wildlife trade
There are only 2,100 lions left in Kenya. We need to save these lions and improve their conservation. You can help by joining us as we embark on the
Facebook Cause: WildlifeDirect 



8 Responses to “Researcher Wants to Find “Sustainable Bushmeat””
Amy, on 17 Nov 2008
Bravo. Well said.
sheryl, washington, dc, on 17 Nov 2008
Y’know, I sit here holding my tongue because I don’t want to offend anyone too deeply, but this plan is … horse manure. Talk about not seeing the forest for the overpopulation of the trees! How about we teach people about birth control and supply them with the means and tackle the real problem on this planet - too many HUMANS! Also, why are we always looking at animals as a source of protein when there are more sources of quality plant protein available? it’s so FRUSTRATING.
s.
Lisa, California, on 17 Nov 2008
Hog wash, horse manure, pile of fly infested buffalo dung : ) Whatever you want to call it. We need to look at ending proverty and I believe a factor in poverty is too many mouths to feed.
Maina, on 18 Nov 2008
Thank you all for the comments. The bushmeat problem is really big. It will take a lot of effort and commitment to solve. As I have said before, we will not solve the bushmeat problem by trying to find sustainable harvesting solutions. Just the same way you cant sustainably sell ivory.
I believe that the only available solution is alternative sources of food and income for the rural poor. If we sat down with them and shared ideas - because they have traditional knowledge that adds value to scientific data - we should be able to come up with solutions that work without “sustainably” harvesting bushmeat.
Dr Richard Leakey once asked me “why not teach the rural poor how to raise chickens?”. My friend Sheryl would not support me on the chickens bit, but let’s think of the chickens as an example of what other alternatives we could come up with if we just took the time to think of solutions that depart from dependence on bushmeat.
While learning economics, my lecturer (professor) quoted an economist, “the rich get richer; the poor get children”. There is a solution there: make rural folk un-poor.
Ellen, on 18 Nov 2008
Paula your blog is hard hitting and entirely truthful. How often do scientists (and I am am one of them) look at problem from the outside and never realise that the root cause is what needs to be focused on. Besides which, with a little bit of internet searching, one can easily find past work from many areas of Africa that prove that there is no circumstance of sustainable bush meat utilization. That is unless it is very isolated and very controlled - not a reality in Africa. Why not research a better source of protein, put money into changing people’s perceptions and concepts with regards to resource utilization and population control. Africa is more and more about crisis management, we rush from one disaster to another, but if we all took the time to unify our efforts we could achieve great things.
Lisa, California, on 19 Nov 2008
I’ve been thinking alot about the Millennium Promise. “The mission of Millennium Promise is to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) - eight globally endorsed objectives that address the many aspects of extreme poverty - in Africa by 2015.” and to end extreme poverty worldwide by 2025.
http://www.millenniumpromise.org/site/PageServer?pagename=home
Pirjo,Finland, on 20 Nov 2008
Thank you for saying these words of wisdom. Us humans are the main problem, because there are far too many of us. We can’t just keep invading the wildlife habitats and clearing all other species out of our way. We are already living on a borrowed time, because our present actions are also paving the way to our species extinction.
David, on 21 Nov 2008
Hi everyone,
Of course this projet looks stupid mostly because hunting methods are not selective…
I worked on the bushmeat issue many years in the Congo Basin and I must say that I’m very glad to read Maina and Dr Leakey raising the question of farming chickens (and pigs). Of course, this is one (if not THE) solution to this crisis. As a vet, I can swear it is technically feasible. Many “pilot” farming experiences have been tried, sorry for them, by people that are not competent for that. Biologists, conservationists, sociologists and all those trying to solve the bushmeat crisis are not specialist of breeding and farming. And that’s why most of those pilot experiences failed. The other reason is that with that “pilot” approach, the first farmers (the pioneers) have to endors all risks and constraints and it’s not profitable for them so they give up.
Farming in the Congo Basin is technically feasible if professionnaly and modernly managed. But it must be too a governement policy and strategy (land planning) and because farming must be implemented in a modern manner so that it can produce huge amounts of protein, it requires support, financially and technically. Then at the end, questions on the global market will have to be solved as for present, it’s not possible for any farmer in the Congo Basin to produce chicken competitivly with EU subsidized surplus that inundate african markets…
Trackback URI | Comments RSS
Leave a Reply