Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Poaching

Poaching is the illegal hunting, capturing, killing, or harvesting of wild animals or plants in violation of applicable laws, often targeting species protected for conservation purposes.^[1]^[2]^[3] This activity encompasses both subsistence-level infractions and large-scale commercial operations, driven primarily by economic incentives such as high black-market demand for animal parts like ivory, rhino horns, and tiger bones used in luxury items or traditional medicines.^[4]^[5]^[6] Poaching has historically involved impoverished individuals supplementing livelihoods but increasingly features organized networks exploiting weak enforcement in remote areas, with global illicit wildlife trade valued in billions annually according to United Nations assessments.^[7]^[8] Its consequences include accelerated species declines—such as African elephants losing approximately 30% of populations since 2006 due to illegal killing—and evolutionary shifts like increased tusklessness in survivors, undermining biodiversity and ecosystem stability.^[9]^[10]^[11] Efforts to curb poaching rely on enhanced patrols, international treaties like CITES, and addressing demand-side factors, though challenges persist from corruption and socioeconomic pressures.^[12]^[13]

Definition and Historical Context

Legal and Conceptual Definitions

Poaching is legally defined as the illegal taking, hunting, capturing, or killing of wildlife, including game animals, fish, birds, or protected species, in violation of statutes governing land access, hunting methods, seasons, quotas, or species protections.^[14]^[15] These definitions vary by jurisdiction but consistently emphasize non-compliance with regulatory frameworks designed to prevent overexploitation and ensure resource sustainability.^[16] In the United States, for instance, poaching encompasses actions like hunting without landowner permission or using prohibited techniques such as illegal netting, often resulting in misdemeanor or felony charges depending on the scale and species involved.^[14]^[17] Internationally, poaching lacks a singular codified definition but is framed within frameworks like the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES, effective 1975), where it constitutes the unlawful harvest preceding prohibited commercial trade in listed species.^[18] United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (UNODC) materials describe poaching as integral to wildlife trafficking chains, involving the capture or killing of protected fauna for parts like ivory, horns, or skins from species such as elephants and rhinoceroses, with penalties enforced under national laws aligned with CITES appendices.^[18] Some definitions extend to unintentional violations, such as accidental non-compliance during otherwise legal activities, though enforcement typically targets deliberate acts.^[16] Conceptually, poaching denotes the illicit and unregulated extraction of wild resources, bypassing legal controls to prioritize immediate gain over long-term ecological balance, as articulated in conservation biology contexts where it erodes biodiversity through unchecked population declines.^[19] This contrasts with licensed hunting, which adheres to science-based quotas; poaching instead reflects evasion of property rights, sustainability limits, or protection statuses, often fueled by market demands for bushmeat, trophies, or medicinal derivatives.^[20]^[21] In broader ecological terms, it embodies a failure of governance over common-pool resources, leading to "tragedy of the commons" dynamics where individual overharvest depletes shared stocks without accountability.^[19]

Evolution from Historical Practices to Modern Illicit Activity

Poaching originated in medieval Europe as the unauthorized hunting of game animals on lands controlled by feudal lords, kings, and nobility, where exclusive rights to hunt were stringently enforced to preserve resources for elite recreation and status. These forest laws, expanded under Norman rule in England after 1066, designated vast royal forests where commoners faced harsh penalties for taking deer, boar, or other quarry, including fines, imprisonment, blinding, castration, or execution by hanging or being hunted in deerskins by dogs.^[22]^[23] Such restrictions stemmed from the need to maintain noble privileges amid limited arable land, with poaching often viewed as a direct challenge to feudal authority rather than a conservation measure.^[22] By the 18th and 19th centuries, poaching persisted primarily as subsistence activity among impoverished rural populations in Europe and colonial territories, supplementing diets amid enclosure movements that privatized common lands and game. In England, the Black Act of 1723 escalated punishments to capital offenses for organized deer poaching in royal enclosures, reflecting ongoing class tensions over access to wild resources, though enforcement waned with industrialization and legal reforms like the Game Act of 1831, which began easing restrictions for licensed hunters.^[22] In parallel, colonial administrations in Africa and Asia labeled indigenous hunting as poaching to assert control over wildlife, prioritizing European sports hunting and export markets over local needs.^[24] The transition to modern illicit activity accelerated in the 20th century as overhunting, habitat loss, and commercial demand threatened species extinction, shifting legal focus from property rights to ecological preservation. Early U.S. legislation like the Lacey Act of 1900 prohibited interstate transport of illegally taken wildlife, marking a federal pivot toward regulating trade to curb market hunting that decimated bison herds to under 1,000 by 1889.^[25] Internationally, the 1973 Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES) established global controls on trade in threatened fauna and flora, ratified by over 180 countries, transforming poaching into a transnational crime often orchestrated by syndicates for high-value products like ivory and rhino horn.^[26] In the contemporary era, poaching has evolved into a lucrative component of organized wildlife crime, with annual global trade values estimated at $7-23 billion, funding insurgent groups and cartels while evading enforcement through advanced technologies like drones and night-vision.^[27] Unlike historical subsistence cases, modern operations target keystone species—such as African elephants, where over 20,000 were poached yearly in the early 2010s—driven by Asian demand for tusks rather than local food needs, exacerbating biodiversity collapse in protected areas.^[4] This shift underscores causal factors like poverty linkages in source countries but increasingly emphasizes market pull and weak governance over mere opportunity poaching.^[7]

Motives and Underlying Drivers

Economic Incentives and Black Market Pressures

Economic incentives underpin much of modern poaching, as participants exploit high black-market prices for wildlife products that exceed those of many legal commodities. The global illegal wildlife trade is estimated to generate between $7 billion and $23 billion annually, positioning it among the most profitable illicit activities worldwide.^[28] This value stems from demand in consumer markets, particularly in Asia, for items like traditional medicines, luxury goods, and status symbols, where rarity and perceived efficacy drive premiums far above production costs.^[4] Poachers and traffickers respond to these signals, as the potential returns—often thousands of times the local wage for a single animal—outweigh risks in regions with weak enforcement.^[29] Black-market pressures amplify these incentives through scarcity-driven price escalation. For instance, rhino horn commands up to $60,000 per kilogram on Asian markets, surpassing the value of gold or cocaine and rendering a single poached rhino worth more than the annual income of many rural households in source countries like South Africa.^[30] Similarly, elephant ivory has fetched up to $1,500 per pound in high-demand areas, though prices fluctuate with supply disruptions and enforcement efforts; historical peaks reached over $2,500 per kilogram in China before domestic bans.^[31] These valuations create asymmetric profit distribution: local poachers receive minimal shares, often $10–50 per horn, while international syndicates capture the bulk via smuggling routes to end-users.^[32] Demand-side factors, including cultural beliefs in medicinal properties unsubstantiated by empirical evidence, sustain elevated prices despite international bans under CITES since 1989 for ivory and 1975 for rhinos.^[33] Enforcement gaps and corruption further entrench black markets, as seen in INTERPOL reports of trade volumes rivaling organized crime in drugs or arms.^[34] Proposed legal trade mechanisms aim to depress prices by increasing supply, but evidence from past ivory auctions suggests they may inadvertently boost overall demand and poaching if not paired with robust demand reduction.^[35] Thus, black-market dynamics impose relentless pressure, converting ecological assets into short-term economic gains at the expense of species viability.

Subsistence Needs, Cultural Practices, and Poverty Linkages

In regions of sub-Saharan Africa, subsistence poaching serves as a primary source of protein for rural households facing limited access to affordable alternatives, with an estimated 4.5 to 4.9 million tonnes of bushmeat harvested annually from over 500 species across communal lands and protected areas.^[36] This practice is particularly prevalent in poverty-stricken communities where livestock ownership or market-based foods are insufficient, correlating positively with household food insecurity rather than overall wealth in studies from areas like the Congo Basin, where annual harvests reach up to 5 million tonnes for local consumption.^[37] ^[38] Cultural traditions amplify subsistence poaching, as bushmeat consumption remains embedded in dietary norms and rituals among indigenous groups, with 30 to 60 percent of rural households in communal tenure zones reporting regular intake as a customary staple rather than a luxury.^[39] In West and Central Africa, species like duikers, monkeys, and rodents are hunted using low-technology methods such as snares and traps, reflecting generational practices that prioritize wild game for nutrition and social events, distinct from high-value commercial targeting of elephants or rhinos.^[40] These cultural drivers persist despite legal prohibitions, as communities view them as extensions of historical self-reliance in resource-scarce environments. Poverty linkages are evident in empirical analyses, where subsistence poaching rates elevate in areas with high unemployment and low alternative livelihoods, such as villages adjacent to Tanzania's Ruaha National Park, where self-admitted poachers cited objective income deficits as key motivators over subjective perceptions of deprivation.^[41] However, correlations vary; while economic inequality and protein shortages directly incentivize opportunistic hunting in the Great Limpopo Transfrontier Park, broader factors like weak enforcement and proximity to wildlife exacerbate participation without implying poverty as the sole causal agent.^[42] ^[7] In such contexts, bushmeat contributes substantially to household economies—ranging from 38 to over 90 percent of cash income in high-dependency sites—yet remains predominantly non-commercial, underscoring poverty's role in sustaining low-impact illegal harvests over organized syndicates.^[43]

Methods and Operational Techniques

Traditional and Technological Hunting Methods

Snares represent one of the most prevalent traditional poaching methods worldwide, consisting of noose-like traps fashioned from wire, rope, or brake cables placed along animal trails to ensnare and asphyxiate wildlife such as antelopes, elephants, and primates. These low-cost devices require minimal skill to deploy and are disproportionately used in subsistence and bushmeat poaching across Africa, where they contribute to high incidental mortality of non-target species including endangered carnivores.^[44] ^[45] ^[46] Other rudimentary techniques include pitfall traps—camouflaged holes designed to impale or immobilize larger mammals—and deadfall traps that drop weighted objects to crush prey, alongside spears or bows for close-range kills, particularly in forested Asian and African regions where firearms are restricted or unavailable. Jaw traps and nets target smaller game like birds or fish, with historical variants such as riverbed excavations to isolate and capture salmon persisting in localized practices. Poisons derived from plant extracts or chemicals have also been applied to water sources or bait to indiscriminately kill fish and amphibians.^[47] ^[48] ^[49] Contemporary poaching, especially by syndicate operations in Africa, integrates advanced tools to overcome detection and maximize yield, including high-caliber rifles and automatic firearms fitted with suppressors for silent, rapid dispatch of targets like rhinos and elephants. Night-vision goggles and thermal optics enable operations under cover of darkness, mirroring countermeasures developed by conservationists but adapted for illicit use since at least the early 2000s in Kenya and South Africa.^[50] ^[27] ^[51] Motorized vehicles, such as four-wheel-drive trucks and motorcycles, provide mobility across rugged terrain, while helicopters and small aircraft—documented in organized poaching rings—allow aerial scouting and extraction in vast reserves. Post-kill, battery-powered chainsaws facilitate swift removal of high-value parts like tusks or horns, reducing exposure time to patrols, as observed in Central African Republic operations by the mid-2010s. Explosives have occasionally supplemented these for breaching enclosures or barriers in high-security areas.^[50] ^[27]

Organization of Poaching Networks

Poaching networks operate as structured operations involving coordinated actors across supply chains, often resembling organized criminal groups (OCGs) defined as three or more persons pursuing financial gain through serious crimes.^[52] These networks typically span source countries where wildlife is harvested, transit points for smuggling, and destination markets, with actors adapting to enforcement pressures through hierarchical or diffuse models.^[53] Integrated structures control the entire chain from poaching to retail, while specialized models focus on segments like transport, collaborating via partnerships.^[52] A common hierarchy divides participants into tiers based on risk and reward, with poachers at the base earning minimal shares—often 5-10% of the product's raw value—while higher levels capture most profits.^[54] Key roles include harvesters who poach or trap animals using local knowledge; intermediaries who consolidate, process, and initially transport goods; couriers who handle cross-border movement, sometimes under coercion or debt; and wholesalers or retailers who distribute in demand countries.^[53] ^[54] Leaders or kingpins finance operations, bribe officials, supply weapons, and manage logistics, often remaining insulated from direct poaching.^[54] Corrupt insiders, such as park rangers or customs agents, facilitate evasion, embedding networks within legitimate systems like logistics firms.^[52] Regional syndicates often execute ground-level poaching, reporting to international traffickers who disguise shipments in commodities like peanuts or furniture for export.^[54] In Africa, Vietnamese-led groups exemplify loose hierarchies: local poaching teams stockpile ivory or rhino horn, middlemen transport to ports, and syndicates coordinate container exports or human mules to Asia.^[55] South African examples include the Groenewald syndicate, linked to 26 rhino deaths through coordinated hunts and trafficking.^[54] Not all networks follow rigid hierarchies; some employ flat, opportunistic models to enhance resilience against arrests, as seen in ivory syndicates avoiding kingpin dependencies.^[56] These structures exploit poverty for recruitment at the poacher level while leveraging global demand for high-value products like rhino horn, enabling OCGs to generate millions—such as the Teng Group's estimated $4 million every two months from ivory.^[53] Enforcement challenges arise from networks' adaptability, including mixed-species shipments to obscure patterns and integration with other crimes like drug trafficking.^[53]

Products and Illicit Trade

Targeted Species and Derived Products

Poaching targets a wide array of wildlife species, primarily large mammals, marine organisms, and certain reptiles, driven by demand for high-value body parts and derivatives in illegal markets. Elephants (Loxodonta africana and L. cyclotis) are extensively poached for their ivory tusks, which are carved into ornaments, jewelry, and trinkets, with an estimated annual poaching mortality rate of approximately 5% as of recent assessments.^[57] Rhinos, particularly the African species (Ceratotherium simum and Diceros bicornis), face severe threats from horn poaching, yielding over 7,100 killings across Africa in a recent decade, with horns ground into powder for purported medicinal uses or fashioned into status symbols like dagger handles in parts of Asia.^[58] Big cats such as tigers (Panthera tigris) are hunted for skins used in fashion and rugs, bones processed into tonics for traditional Asian medicine, and other parts like claws for amulets, contributing to a poaching surge that has elevated body part seizures to 56 incidents in monitored areas.^[59] Bears, including Asiatic black bears (Ursus thibetanus), are targeted for bile extracted for folk remedies in Asia, sustaining ongoing illegal extraction despite regulatory bans.^[60] Pangolins (Manis spp.) rank among the most trafficked mammals, poached for scales believed to treat ailments in traditional Chinese medicine and meat consumed as a delicacy.^[4] Marine species constitute another major category, with abalone (Haliotis spp.) poached in vast quantities—exceeding 3,000 tonnes annually in South African waters alone—for dried flesh prized as a luxury seafood in Chinese cuisine, often valued at over $200 per kilogram.^[61] Sharks (Selachimorpha) are finned for their dorsal and pectoral fins used in soup, a delicacy in East Asia, while sea cucumbers (Holothuroidea) and totoaba fish (Totoaba macdonaldi) are harvested for dried products like swim bladders (fish maw) in soups and tonics.^[62] Seahorses (Hippocampus spp.) and certain fish are also poached for traditional medicines and aquariums, exacerbating declines in overfished stocks.^[63] Derived products extend to trophies such as mounted heads and hides from various ungulates and birds, bushmeat from primates and antelopes for local consumption, and exotic pets from parrots and reptiles.^[4] These items fuel black markets estimated at over $10 billion annually, with poachers capturing only a fraction of retail value—typically 5-10%—while syndicates profit disproportionately.^[64]^[65]

Global Supply Chains and Market Dynamics

The global supply chains for poached wildlife products typically originate in biodiversity-rich source countries in Africa and Asia, where poachers extract raw materials such as rhino horns, elephant ivory, and pangolin scales, before transiting through intermediary hubs and reaching consumer markets primarily in East Asia.^[66] These chains involve hierarchical networks of local hunters, middlemen, smugglers, and wholesalers, often exploiting corruption at borders and ports to evade detection.^[67] Nigeria and Vietnam have emerged as key transit points, linked to nearly 70% of pangolin scale seizures between 2016 and 2019, facilitating flows from African poaching grounds to Asian demand centers.^[68] Market dynamics are driven by persistent demand for traditional Chinese medicine, status symbols, and luxury goods, with the illegal wildlife trade valued at up to $20 billion annually as of 2023.^[29] Rhino horn prices have exhibited volatility, crashing to their lowest levels in 2020 after declines since 2016, influenced by increased enforcement, stockpiled supplies entering the market, and shifting consumer perceptions; raw horn fetched approximately $8,683 per kilogram in Africa versus $17,852 in Asia prior to these trends.^[69] Ivory markets show similar pressures, with illicit prices averaging $92 per kilogram across Africa and $400 per kilogram in the East as of 2024, sustained by open domestic markets in Japan, Vietnam, and Thailand despite international bans.^[70] Pangolin scales, trafficked predominantly from Africa via Nigeria to China, have seen average values drop by about one-third between 2016 and 2017 before stabilizing, reflecting supply disruptions from seizures and bans.^[71] These dynamics underscore causal factors like high black-market premiums—rhino horn reaching $30,000 to $100,000 per kilogram in peak demand—fueling organized crime involvement, while enforcement actions and demand-reduction campaigns have occasionally depressed prices without eradicating trade.^[72] Reports from the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime highlight that while seizure data indicate positive impacts from interdictions, underlying drivers such as poverty in source areas and cultural consumption in end markets perpetuate resilient illicit flows.^[73]^[74]

Ecological Impacts

Direct Effects on Target Populations

Poaching directly reduces the population sizes of targeted species through selective mortality, often targeting reproductively mature individuals, which disrupts demographic structures and hinders recovery. This leads to accelerated declines, local extirpations, and elevated extinction risks, as evidenced by empirical studies showing higher local extinction probabilities in poached areas for species like golden monkeys and bushbuck.^[75]^[76] In African elephants (Loxodonta africana and L. cyclotis), poaching for ivory has driven annual mortality rates exceeding natural reproduction, with estimates of over 20,000 elephants killed yearly as of 2023, contributing to their classification as endangered or critically endangered by the IUCN. Forest elephants face poaching as the primary threat, exacerbating population fragmentation and genetic bottlenecks from the selective removal of tusked individuals.^[59]^[58]^[57] White rhinoceros (Ceratotherium simum) populations in South Africa experienced 420 poaching incidents in 2024, a 15% decline from 2023 but still sufficient to offset gains from anti-poaching efforts when combined with habitat stressors, resulting in stalled or reversed population growth in key reserves. Modeling for lions indicates that halving lethal poaching pressure can boost populations by 40%, underscoring the direct causal link between poaching intensity and viability in large carnivores and herbivores.^[77]^[78]^[79] These effects manifest in reduced encounter rates and detection probabilities for wildlife in poached zones, signaling behavioral avoidance or outright depletion, as observed across multiple species in field surveys. Sustained poaching pressure thus creates a feedback loop where diminished numbers further vulnerability to stochastic events, pushing target populations toward critical thresholds.^[76]^[4]

Indirect Ecosystem Disruptions

Poaching of keystone species such as elephants in African ecosystems triggers trophic cascades by diminishing their role as megaherbivores and seed dispersers, leading to proliferation of woody vegetation and shifts in understory plant communities that disadvantage dependent herbivores and pollinators. In Central African forests, where poaching has reduced elephant densities by up to 62% between 2002 and 2011 in some regions, forest composition alters through decreased dispersal of large-seeded trees and increased density of small-seeded species, elevating tree recruitment and potentially homogenizing biodiversity akin to patterns in Neotropical forests lacking analogous dispersers.^[80]^[81] The removal of large herbivores like elephants and rhinos via poaching disrupts grazing dynamics, allowing invasive lianas and encroaching shrubs to smother native flora, which in turn reduces habitat suitability for smaller ungulates and birds reliant on open savanna structures; experimental exclosures in African savannas demonstrate that herbivore exclusion—mimicking poaching-induced declines—can increase liana abundance by over 300% within years, stunting tree reproduction and biodiversity.^[82] Poaching-driven collapses in global large herbivore populations, estimated at 60% since 1970, propagate indirect effects to scavengers, mesopredators, and soil nutrient cycles by altering carrion availability and vegetation-mediated fire regimes, often amplifying mesoherbivore irruptions that further degrade grasslands.^[83] In cases of poaching apex herbivores like white rhinoceros, atypical trophic cascades emerge as grazers' absence favors unpalatable grass species, diminishing forage quality for co-occurring browsers and bovids, with modeled projections indicating potential 20-50% declines in secondary herbivore biomass alongside vegetation coarsening.^[84] Marine poaching, particularly of sharks and large predatory fish through illegal gillnetting and longlining, indirectly cascades to mesopredator booms and prey overgrazing of seagrass beds and reefs, as evidenced by reef systems where shark removals correlate with 30-50% increases in invertebrate herbivores, eroding algal control and coral resilience.^[85] These disruptions underscore poaching's role in destabilizing ecosystem services like carbon sequestration and pollination, with empirical data from protected areas showing recovery lags of decades post-poaching cessation.

Human and Socioeconomic Impacts

Consequences for Local Communities and Livelihoods

In regions of sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia, poaching often emerges as a coping mechanism for rural poverty, providing subsistence protein and supplemental income where formal employment and agricultural yields falter. A study of self-admitted poachers near Tanzania's Ruaha National Park found that 173 respondents, predominantly from low-income households, viewed illegal hunting as essential for meeting basic needs, with objective poverty measures like asset ownership correlating strongly with participation rates.^[86] Similarly, in networks linked to illegal wildlife trade, impoverished locals serve as low-level hunters or middlemen, deriving irregular earnings that act as a safety net during crop failures or unemployment, though this perpetuates cycles of economic marginalization without building sustainable skills.^[7] Bushmeat poaching in the Congo and Amazon Basins exemplifies acute livelihood dependencies, where wild game supplies up to 80% of animal protein for millions in remote communities lacking access to domestic livestock or markets. Overexploitation has resulted in "empty forest syndrome," with large-bodied species populations crashing by over 60% in some areas since the 1980s, eroding nutritional diversity and forcing reliance on less nutritious alternatives like cassava, which contributes to malnutrition rates exceeding 40% in affected Congolese villages.^[87] This depletion cascades into broader food insecurity, as declining wildlife disrupts seed dispersal and pest control services vital for smallholder farming, amplifying vulnerability to climate variability and disease.^[46] Commercial poaching networks exacerbate community harms by co-opting locals into high-risk roles, exposing them to violence from rival gangs or enforcement raids that destroy snares and weapons without addressing root poverty. In southern Africa, illegal wildlife trade inflicts economic losses estimated at $7-23 billion annually continent-wide, including foregone tourism revenues that could generate 1.5 million jobs; for example, Namibia allocates $17 million yearly to anti-poaching, yet unchecked trade risks $350 million in lost safari income benefiting rural guides and lodge workers.^[88] Enforcement-heavy responses often displace communities from ancestral lands, fostering resentment and undermining trust in conservation, as locals perceive benefits accruing disproportionately to urban elites or foreign operators rather than addressing immediate needs like infrastructure or alternative protein sources.^[89]

Broader Economic Costs of Poaching and Regulatory Responses

Illegal wildlife trade, encompassing poaching of terrestrial species, illegal unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing, and illegal logging, imposes substantial economic burdens beyond direct illicit revenues, with global estimates ranging from $1 trillion to $2 trillion annually when including losses from ecosystem services degradation, forgone sustainable resource use, and diminished biodiversity-dependent sectors. ^[90] ^[91] Over 90% of these costs stem from indirect effects, such as reduced carbon sequestration, soil erosion, and fishery collapses, rather than the black market value of products, which for wildlife alone is estimated at $7 billion to $23 billion per year. ^[4] ^[28] IUU fishing exacerbates these losses by depriving coastal states of $10 billion to $23 billion in annual revenue from legal catches, while broader global economic impacts, including supply chain disruptions and lost jobs, reach $26 billion to $50 billion yearly. ^[92] ^[93] In wildlife poaching hotspots like Africa, the depletion of charismatic species such as elephants and rhinos undermines tourism, a sector generating $120 billion globally in 2018—five times the revenue from illegal trade. ^[94] Elephant poaching alone has been projected to cause tourism revenue shortfalls of up to $25 million annually in affected regions, with broader losses tied to declining visitor numbers as populations dwindle below viable safari thresholds. ^[95] Rhino poaching between 2006 and 2014 resulted in estimated tourism losses of €205 million across South Africa, Namibia, Kenya, and Zimbabwe, illustrating how poaching erodes incentives for habitat conservation and local employment in ecotourism. ^[96] Illegal logging compounds these issues, with trade volumes valued at $51 billion to $152 billion annually, leading to $6 billion to $9 billion in lost government tax revenues worldwide and inflating global timber prices by 1.5% to 3.5% for roundwood due to supply distortions. ^[97] ^[98] Regulatory responses to poaching emphasize prohibitions and enforcement under frameworks like the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), which restrict commercial trade in listed species to curb demand-driven depletion. ^[74] National implementations, such as bans on ivory and rhino horn markets, aim to reduce poaching incentives but incur enforcement costs; for instance, anti-poaching patrols and ranger operations can range from $2,000 to $10,000 per ranger annually, with significant budget allocations—up to 40% of wildlife funding since 2010—directed toward protected area management. ^[99] ^[100] Economic analyses, including cost-benefit studies in Namibia, indicate that curbing illegal wildlife trade yields net benefits by preserving tourism and legal harvesting revenues, though high upfront investments in surveillance and prosecution strain developing economies. ^[101] These measures, while reducing poaching rates in targeted areas, face challenges from black market persistence, with illicit wildlife product values holding at up to $20 billion yearly into the 2020s despite intensified controls. ^[29]

Legal Frameworks

International Treaties and Conventions

The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), adopted on March 3, 1973, in Washington, D.C., and entering into force on July 1, 1975, serves as the cornerstone international agreement regulating global trade in threatened wildlife and plants to prevent over-exploitation through commercial activities that fuel poaching.^[102] ^[103] With 184 parties as of 2024, representing over 95% of global trade volume, CITES lists species in three appendices: Appendix I prohibits commercial international trade in highly endangered species (e.g., African elephants Loxodonta africana for ivory); Appendix II requires export permits for species not necessarily threatened but potentially at risk (e.g., many big cats and parrots); and Appendix III allows unilateral listings by parties for monitored trade.^[104] ^[102] By curbing legal trade pathways, CITES indirectly combats poaching driven by black market demand, though it relies on national enforcement for implementation, with parties required to designate management authorities for permitting and scientific authorities for non-detriment assessments.^[103] ^[105] Complementing CITES, the Convention on the Conservation of Migratory Species of Wild Animals (CMS), also known as the Bonn Convention, adopted on June 23, 1979, and effective from November 1, 1983, addresses poaching threats to migratory species across borders, obligating parties to conserve habitats and prohibit capture or killing except for scientific or educational purposes. With 133 parties as of 2023, CMS focuses on species like whales, birds, and bats listed in Appendix I (strict protection) or Appendix II (cooperative agreements), facilitating range-state collaborations to mitigate poaching during migration routes, such as for saiga antelope in Central Asia. The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD), signed at the 1992 Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro and entering into force on December 29, 1993, provides a broader framework by committing 196 parties to sustainable use of biological resources and prevention of species decline, including through measures against illegal harvesting that constitutes poaching. While not trade-specific like CITES, the CBD's Article 8 emphasizes in-situ conservation and controls on access to genetic resources, influencing national anti-poaching policies via its Aichi Biodiversity Targets (2010–2020) and post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework, which highlight illegal wildlife trade as a key driver of biodiversity loss. ^[106] These treaties operate through periodic Conferences of the Parties (CoPs)—CITES holds them every 2–3 years, with CoP19 in 2022 downlisting some species while upholding bans on others like rhinos amid ongoing poaching pressures—and foster cooperation via bodies like the CITES Animals and Plants Committees for compliance reviews.^[102] ^[105] Enforcement gaps persist due to varying national capacities, with illegal trade estimated to evade CITES controls in billions annually, underscoring the treaties' role in establishing norms rather than direct suppression of field-level poaching.^[107] ^[4]

National Laws and Regional Enforcement Variations

In the United States, the Lacey Act of 1900 serves as the primary federal statute combating poaching by prohibiting the interstate or foreign commerce of wildlife taken in violation of any state, federal, or foreign law, with penalties including fines up to $250,000 and imprisonment for up to five years for misdemeanors, escalating to felonies with harsher sentences for repeat offenses or endangered species involvement.^[14] State-level laws supplement this, treating many forms of poaching as felonies with penalties such as fines exceeding $10,000 and jail terms up to several years, though enforcement relies on resource allocation varying by state, with better outcomes in areas like national parks supported by federal agencies.^[108] In African nations, penalties often appear stringent on paper but enforcement diverges sharply by region and country capacity. Kenya's Wildlife Conservation and Management Act of 2013 imposes life imprisonment or fines up to $200,000 for poaching endangered species like elephants, reflecting aggressive anti-poaching drives amid high ivory demand, yet conviction rates remain low due to evidentiary challenges and corruption.^[109] Conversely, Mozambique applies milder sanctions, with fines or short prison terms for basic poaching offenses, contributing to spillover effects on neighboring protected areas like South Africa's Kruger National Park, where cross-border incursions persist despite South Africa's Parks and Wildlife Act fines starting at $400 for minor infractions but rising significantly for trophies.^[110] Namibia strengthened its Nature Conservation Ordinance in 2017 to include up to 20-year sentences for rhino or elephant poaching, correlating with localized declines in incidents, though broader southern African enforcement benefits from community reporting networks absent in central and eastern hotspots plagued by poverty-driven participation.^[111]^[112] Asian countries exhibit similar disparities, with India's Wildlife Protection Act of 1972 prescribing up to seven years' imprisonment and fines for tiger poaching, enforced variably through specialized task forces that have reduced incidents in reserves like Ranthambore, but undermined by porous borders and demand from markets in China and Vietnam where penalties under China's 1988 Wildlife Protection Law cap at 10 years yet suffer from inconsistent application amid high black-market volumes.^[113] Globally, only about half of nations report maximum penalties exceeding four years for wildlife crimes, with enforcement efficacy tied to institutional integrity rather than statutory severity; regions like southern Africa achieve lower poaching rates through integrated patrols, while northern and eastern Africa lag due to underfunded rangers and syndicate infiltration.^[114]^[115]

Anti-Poaching Measures

Law Enforcement and Surveillance Technologies

Law enforcement efforts against poaching have integrated advanced surveillance technologies to improve detection, response times, and patrol coordination, particularly in vast protected areas where traditional foot patrols are insufficient. These tools enable real-time monitoring, data-driven decision-making, and proactive interventions, shifting from reactive to predictive strategies.^[116]^[117] Unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs or drones) are widely deployed for aerial surveillance, equipped with high-resolution cameras, thermal imaging, and GPS to scan remote terrains for poacher incursions or animal carcasses. In Kruger National Park, South Africa, drone deployments have increased intruder detections and correlated with reduced poaching incidents by enabling rapid ranger mobilization. Drones can cover large areas quickly, identifying heat signatures of humans or vehicles at night, though their effectiveness depends on battery life, weather conditions, and regulatory airspace restrictions. AI integration allows autonomous flight paths and automated threat alerts, as seen in African conservation projects where machine learning processes drone footage to distinguish poachers from wildlife.^[118]^[119]^[120] Ground-based systems include camera traps and acoustic sensors, which provide persistent monitoring without constant human presence. AI-enhanced camera traps, such as those developed by Conservation X Labs' Sentinel platform, analyze images in real-time to identify species, human activity, or weapons, filtering out non-threats and transmitting alerts via satellite connectivity to rangers in remote areas. In projects led by the Zoological Society of London (ZSL), these traps have enabled immediate responses to poaching threats in off-grid locations like African savannas. Acoustic sensors detect gunshots or chainsaw sounds associated with ivory or timber poaching, with gunshot detection systems improving anti-poaching operation efficiency by providing directional data for patrols. Thermal imaging devices, like FLIR cameras installed in Kenya's Lake Nakuru National Park, facilitated the arrest of a poacher within one week of deployment by capturing nighttime movements.^[117]^[121]^[122] Satellite-based surveillance complements these by offering broad-scale oversight, using commercial imagery and AI algorithms to track deforestation, animal migrations, or suspicious vehicle tracks indicative of poaching networks. Initiatives like Archangel Imaging employ European Space Agency satellites with AI to monitor protected areas, detecting anomalies such as snare lines or carcass sites in near real-time. The Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool (SMART), adopted in over 900 sites globally by 2023, integrates data from these technologies—drones, cameras, and patrols—into analytics platforms that optimize ranger routes and assess enforcement outcomes, leading to measurable improvements in patrol coverage and poaching deterrence in parks like Sumatra's Kerinci Seblat National Park.^[123]^[116]^[124] Despite these advances, technology adoption faces hurdles including high costs, poacher adaptations like signal jammers, and the need for robust data infrastructure in developing regions. The global anti-poaching sensors market, valued at USD 250 million in 2024, is projected to grow at 15.9% CAGR through 2030, reflecting increasing investment but also the ongoing challenge of scaling effective integration with on-ground enforcement.^[125]^[126]

Militarized and Community Incentive Programs

Militarized anti-poaching programs involve deploying armed forces, often with military tactics and equipment, to patrol protected areas and confront poachers directly. In South Africa, the South African National Defence Force (SANDF) has been integrated into operations in Kruger National Park since 2008, escalating under Operation Rhino, where soldiers conduct joint patrols with rangers, leading to the interdiction of over 200 poachers between 2008 and 2018.^[127] Despite these efforts, rhino poaching in Kruger persisted at high levels, with 504 rhinos killed in 2017 alone, and overall national incidents rising sharply in subsequent years, indicating limited long-term deterrence against organized syndicates.^[127]^[128] Such approaches have drawn criticism for fostering "green militarization," which may escalate violence, contribute to human rights concerns among local communities, and fail to address root economic drivers of poaching.^[129]^[130] In contrast, community incentive programs emphasize economic benefits to local populations for wildlife protection, reducing poaching incentives through revenue from tourism, sustainable hunting quotas, and resource access rights. Namibia's community conservancy model, established under the 1996 Nature Conservation Amendment Act, has empowered over 80 conservancies covering 20% of the country's land, generating income via trophy hunting and ecotourism that supports anti-poaching patrols and community development.^[131] This framework correlates with substantial wildlife recoveries, such as elephant populations rebounding from near-extinction in the northwest by the early 1980s to sustainable levels, and an 80% decline in rhino poaching incidents from 2015–2019 to 2020–2024.^[132] Case studies across Africa and Asia indicate that such programs, incorporating positive incentives like benefit-sharing, enhance reporting of poaching and sustain conservation efforts more effectively than enforcement alone, though success depends on equitable revenue distribution and minimal external dependency.^[133]^[134] Programs in Nepal have similarly reduced rhino poaching by channeling tourism revenues to communities, underscoring the role of local stakeholding in disrupting illegal trade networks.^[32]

Criticisms, Controversies, and Alternatives

Ineffectiveness and Unintended Consequences of Bans

Empirical analyses reveal that international bans on wildlife trade, such as those imposed under the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species (CITES), often fail to curb poaching and can intensify it by channeling demand into black markets, where restricted supply drives up prices and elevates financial incentives for illegal harvesting.^[135]^[136] This dynamic arises from inelastic consumer demand—particularly for high-value products like rhino horn or caviar—coupled with weak enforcement in source countries, creating a "monopoly" for illicit traders who capitalize on scarcity without bearing production costs.^[136] A prominent example is the post-1977 CITES ban on rhino horn trade, which correlated with escalated poaching in South Africa; by 2010, 260 rhinos were illegally killed annually, as black market prices surged over 400% within two years of stricter listings, far outpacing any legal alternatives.^[135] Similarly, unilateral import bans, such as the U.S. prohibition on wild-caught parrots, demonstrated no detectable deterrence on poaching levels and potentially stimulated higher illegal captures by inflating underground values without addressing supply-side drivers. Over half of peer-reviewed studies on wildlife trade regulations, including bans, document unintended consequences, such as trade displacement to alternative species, markets, or online platforms like social media, thereby sustaining or expanding illegal networks rather than dismantling them.^[137] Instances include heightened illegal seahorse and pangolin trafficking following export restrictions, where poachers shifted efforts to evade controls, and broader socio-economic fallout like diminished local incomes from foregone sustainable harvests.^[137] Bans further exacerbate issues by eroding economic incentives for conservation; ambiguous property rights over wildlife encourage opportunistic poaching, while lost revenues from regulated trade undermine community-led protection efforts.^[136] In Botswana, the 2014 trophy hunting ban led to the abandonment of hunter-funded boreholes essential for wildlife, coinciding with reported upticks in elephant poaching as alternative funding dried up and human-wildlife conflicts intensified without mitigation income.^[138] Although select national interventions, like the 1992 U.S. Wild Bird Conservation Act, reduced legal imports and nest poaching for Neotropical parrots through targeted permitting, international bans typically falter without synchronized domestic enforcement, demand-side measures, or clear ownership reforms, often amplifying poaching pressures and conservation costs in resource-limited regions.^[135]

Sustainable Use Models and Property Rights Approaches

Sustainable use models emphasize assigning economic value to wildlife through regulated activities such as trophy hunting and ecotourism, which generate revenue for conservation and local communities, thereby incentivizing protection over illegal exploitation.^[139] ^[140] These approaches contrast with outright bans by creating legal markets that fund anti-poaching efforts and habitat management, with empirical evidence from southern Africa showing population recoveries where such models are implemented.^[141] Property rights approaches complement this by devolving ownership or usufruct rights to individuals, communities, or private entities, aligning private incentives with long-term resource stewardship; studies indicate that secure rights reduce poaching by making wildlife an economic asset rather than a commons tragedy.^[142] In Zimbabwe, the Communal Areas Management Programme for Indigenous Resources (CAMPFIRE), established in 1989, exemplifies community-based property rights by granting rural district councils authority over wildlife management and revenue from safari hunting and tourism.^[143] This has protected approximately 50,000 square kilometers of habitat, with elephant populations in participating areas doubling from 4,000 to 8,000 individuals by the early 2000s due to benefits like employment and infrastructure funded by hunting fees.^[144] ^[145] Despite uneven benefit distribution and external pressures like the U.S. ivory import suspension in 2014, which canceled hunts and reduced revenues, CAMPFIRE has sustained conservation where state control previously failed, as communities derive tangible gains from live animals exceeding poaching values.^[146] South Africa's private game reserves demonstrate the efficacy of individualized property rights, where landowners convert farmland to wildlife enterprises, now conserving over 20 million game animals across 15% of the land—more than state-protected areas.^[147] These reserves hold about 40% of the world's white rhinos, with poaching rates significantly lower than in state parks; for instance, private losses averaged 0.5% of white rhino populations annually in recent years, compared to higher incidences in Kruger National Park, where 406 rhinos were poached in 2023 versus 93 on private lands. ^[148] Private management has reduced elephant poaching by up to 35% through invested surveillance and incentives, outperforming public areas reliant on underfunded enforcement.^[142] Overall, these models have reversed declines in regions like southern Africa by addressing root causes of poaching—poverty and lack of local stake—unlike bans, which often exacerbate illegal trade without alternatives; systematic reviews confirm that aligned property incentives yield better ecological outcomes than restrictive measures alone.^[137] ^[149] Challenges persist, including governance failures and international trade restrictions that undermine revenues, but evidence underscores that empowering stakeholders with rights fosters stewardship superior to centralized prohibitions.^[150]

Recent Trends and Data

Current Poaching Statistics and Hotspots

In 2024, South Africa recorded 420 rhino poaching incidents, marking a 15% decline from 2023, though organized crime syndicates continue to drive demand for horns primarily in Asia.^[77] By mid-2025, 195 rhinos had been poached nationwide, with state-owned lands accounting for 63% of losses, levels comparable to the prior year.^[151] Key hotspots include Kruger National Park and KwaZulu-Natal province, where poaching shifted from park interiors to private reserves amid intensified patrols.^[152] Elephant poaching persists in Central and East African hotspots such as Tanzania, Mozambique, and Gabon, fueled by ivory demand, though large-scale seizures declined post-pandemic, with 2024 figures 20-30% below 2019 peaks according to seizure data analyzed by conservation groups.^[153] Genetic tracing of ivory links major supply to these regions, where annual losses exceed 10,000 elephants in high-risk zones despite international bans.^[74] Tiger poaching, concentrated in India and Southeast Asia, saw 26 documented cases in 2024, up slightly from prior years, with India's forests emerging as a critical hotspot due to domestic and cross-border trafficking networks.^[58]^[154] Pangolin trafficking remains rampant, with estimates of one animal poached every three minutes globally for scales and meat, primarily sourced from African nations like Nigeria and South Africa for Asian markets; seizures of over 160,000 pounds of scales in the past five years equate to roughly 800,000 individuals killed.^[155]^[156] Large-scale pangolin seizures in 2024 were 84% lower than 2019 highs, attributed to enforcement disruptions, yet underreporting suggests sustained pressure on populations across sub-Saharan Africa and Southeast Asia.^[153] Illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing hotspots span Southeast Asia's South China Sea, the eastern central Atlantic off West Africa, and the western Indian Ocean, where unreported vessels operate in up to 7% of global high-biodiversity areas, contributing to annual economic losses of $7-25 billion.^[157] In the Philippines, IUU activities surged in 2024-2025, exacerbating fishery declines amid weak monitoring.^[158] Overall, illicit wildlife trade, excluding fisheries, generates $7.8-10 billion annually, with accurate tracking limited to six countries: South Africa, Kenya, Mozambique, Namibia, Botswana, and India.^[159]^[113]

Emerging Patterns and Policy Responses

In South Africa, rhino poaching incidents have shifted geographically, with KwaZulu-Natal (KZN) province recording approximately twice as many cases as Kruger National Park in the first six months of 2024, a trend persisting into 2025.^[152] This redistribution reflects poachers' adaptation to intensified enforcement in traditional hotspots, exploiting vulnerabilities in private reserves and smaller protected areas.^[160] Overall, South Africa reported 91 rhino poaching deaths in the first three months of 2025 alone, indicating a potential uptick amid ongoing demand for horns in illicit markets.^[160] Emerging species vulnerabilities include greater threats to antelopes, buffalo, lions, apes, African grey parrots, and poison dart frogs, driven by expanding demand for bushmeat, pets, and traditional medicines.^[58] The wildlife pet trade has gained prominence, with local demand in regions like the Neotropics outpacing documented international trafficking for species such as parrots, necessitating updated monitoring of urban markets.^[161] Methods have evolved to include electrocution via high-voltage cables and advanced netting techniques, complicating detection efforts.^[162] Additionally, the European Union continues as a major trafficking hub, with first-time seizures of 88 new species documented in 2023, signaling broadening trade networks.^[163] Policy responses have emphasized enhanced data-driven enforcement and international coordination. Bhutan's Department of Forests and Park Services launched a Zero Poaching Strategy in August 2025, incorporating Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool (SMART) patrolling to track trends and improve response times.^[164] The United States introduced the Wildlife Confiscations Network Act of 2025 to bolster asset forfeiture from traffickers, aiming to disrupt financial incentives.^[165] At the global level, the International Consortium on Combating Wildlife Crime (ICCWC) supported 124 countries in 2024 through capacity-building for transnational network disruptions.^[166] The U.S. Department of State's 2024 END Wildlife Trafficking Strategic Review highlighted pre-emptive arrests of prospective poachers, informed by intelligence, as a key intervention reducing incidents in high-risk areas.^[167] The United Nations General Assembly adopted a resolution in June 2025 calling for a session on global illicit wildlife trafficking status, including poaching trends, to inform adaptive strategies.^[168] Proposed IUCN guidelines at the 2025 World Conservation Congress seek to regulate the pet trade more stringently, addressing under-regulated domestic markets.^[169] These measures reflect a pivot toward proactive, evidence-based approaches amid shifting poaching dynamics, though their efficacy depends on sustained funding and cross-border collaboration.^[74]

References

[1]
Poaching - National Geographic Education
Poaching is the illegal trafficking and killing of wildlife. Sometimes animal or plant parts are sold as trophies or “folk medicines” and sometimes they are ...
[2]
Poachers kill thousands of animals every year - Rainforest Trust
Poaching—the illegal hunting or capture of wildlife—is one of the largest, most vicious threats to biodiversity and threatens the survival of countless species ...
[3]
What is Poaching and How Hunters Can Report It | HuntWise
Oct 16, 2025 · What is Poaching? Sometimes referred to as wildlife crime, poaching is the illegal hunting, capturing, or killing of wildlife. Poaching ...
[4]
From Poaching, Trafficking, To Demand. Wildlife Crime Explained
Poaching: Why animals are illegally hunted. Illegal wildlife trade is fueled by high profit margins and the steep prices paid for rare and endangered species.
[5]
The Economics of Poaching - Etonomics
Oct 13, 2021 · High ivory prices drive poaching, with poachers earning more than local wages. High prices also incentivize more poaching, and rising incomes ...
[6]
[PDF] Wildlife Poaching and Trafficking in Africa: An Overview
Sep 13, 2021 · and Crime (UNODC), identify various economic incentives as drivers of wildlife poaching and trafficking in Africa. “Subsistence” poachers ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[7]
Toward a new understanding of the links between poverty and ...
Through an examination of policy and academic literatures on poaching and illegal wildlife use our goal was to develop a richer understanding of contemporary ...
[8]
[PDF] World Wildlife Crime Report - the United Nations
level participants in poaching and delivery of illegal wildlife goods. The majority claimed it was their first involvement and they had been motivated by ...
[9]
Human well-being is associated with reduced elephant poaching
Jan 11, 2023 · African elephant populations have experienced significant declines (~30%) since 2006 due to consistently high rates of illegal killing ( ...
[10]
An introduction to illegal wildlife trade and its effects on biodiversity ...
Furthermore, poaching pressure can cause species to lose iconic phenotypic traits. For example, poaching has increased the ratio of tuskless female elephants ( ...Missing: empirical | Show results with:empirical
[11]
The impact of poaching and regime switching on the dynamics of ...
1. Poaching has led to the reduction and disappearance of many species around the world and has a major impact on the structure and function of ecosystems.
[12]
ICCWC Showcases Global Efforts to Combat Wildlife Crime ... - CITES
Mar 28, 2025 · Top-funded interventions included protected and conserved area management to address poaching, criminal justice, and sustainable livelihoods.Missing: scale | Show results with:scale
[13]
[PDF] MONITORING ONLINE ILLEGAL WILDLIFE TRADE - CITES
Detection and monitoring efforts are inevitably difficult in the vast remote areas where poaching often occurs, leaving many ecosystems vulnerable. Additionally ...
[14]
Poaching Laws - LegalMatch
Sep 28, 2023 · Poaching is the illegal killing or capturing of wildlife, which is generally considered a criminal misdemeanor.
[15]
[PDF] Chapter 11: Illegal Harvest - ODFW
Poaching is defined as illegally taking or killing fish, wildlife, and birds. Take methods for the purpose of this document include any methods of capturing ...
[16]
[PDF] Wildlife Poaching on US Federal Lands
Wildlife poaching is defined as the intentional or unintentional act of non-compliance with wildlife laws and regulations. This guide seeks to provide ...<|separator|>
[17]
Increased Penalties for Poaching and Incentivizing the Reporting of ...
Poaching, whether done to illegally harvest and sell animal parts, to procure meat, or purely for amusement, violates laws governing the harvesting of wildlife.
[18]
Criminalization of Wildlife Trafficking - unodc
Wildlife trafficking involves the illegal trade, smuggling, poaching, capture, or collection of endangered species, protected wildlife.
[19]
Poaching - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics
Poaching is defined as the unregulated hunting of wildlife, which is often conducted for bush meat that contributes significantly to the income and food ...
[20]
What is poaching? - International Fund for Animal Welfare
Apr 26, 2024 · Poaching is the illegal hunting or capture of animals that are not one's own. In many cases, poaching involves killing animals with the intent to acquire their ...
[21]
Hunting vs Poaching: Get the Facts - NRA-ILA
Unlike legal hunters, poachers do not have legal permission from the owner of the land to hunt. They illegally take animals, simply for their valuable parts.
[22]
Poaching | Description, History, Examples, & Control | Britannica
Oct 1, 2025 · Poaching, in law, the illegal shooting, trapping, or taking of game, fish, or plants from private property or from a place where such practices are specially ...
[23]
[PDF] English and American Wildlife Law: Lessons from the Past - SEAFWA
Since the Middle Ages the English have tried implementing, at one time or another, almost every law that could be imagined for the taking and harvesting of ...<|separator|>
[24]
A Brief History of Poaching in Africa - ThoughtCo
Jan 29, 2020 · All hunting by Africans during the colonial era was called poaching and it later became a way for terrorists to secure funding for their ...
[25]
America's Top 10 Federal Conservation Laws for the Protection ...
Feb 19, 2025 · In 1973, what some call the Magna Carta of the environmental movement was enacted. The Endangered Species Act serves to protect plant and animal ...Lacey Act · Clean Water Act · National Wildlife Refuge...
[26]
Historical timeline | U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service
1956. Congress passes the Fish and Wildlife Act. It authorizes the Secretary of the Interior to make decisions for the development, management, advancement, ...Missing: poaching legislation
[27]
International Wildlife Poaching In The Twenty-First Century
Because of the huge profits and the low risks, poaching and trafficking have, in the new millennium, attracted numbers of criminal syndicates, leading to ...
[28]
Illegal Wildlife Trade | GEF
The value of illegal trade has been estimated at between $7 and $23 billion per year, making wildlife crime one of the most lucrative illegal businesses.
[29]
Illegal wildlife trade is a top global crime, INTERPOL says
Dec 5, 2023 · How big is the illegal wildlife market? Illegal wildlife products are now worth up to $20 billion a year on the black market – where goods are ...
[30]
Which Is More Valuable: Gold, Cocaine or Rhino Horn?
Oct 25, 2024 · A recent report puts the price of rhino horn in Asia at $60,000 per pound. Rhinos are in serious danger of extinction from poaching. Rhino ...
[31]
Fighting the Ivory Trade | U.S. Customs and Border Protection
May 4, 2023 · Staggering black market prices in Asia for the white gold entices poachers. Ivory can fetch up to $1,500 per pound and two male elephant ...Missing: drivers | Show results with:drivers
[32]
Dismantling the poachernomics of the illegal wildlife trade
The poaching economy of such storable goods is driven by a combination of persistent consumer demand and market speculation, and enabled by weak governance, ...
[33]
Stopping elephant ivory demand - World Wildlife Fund
Chinese consumers have typically been the driving demographic for elephant ivory sales globally since 2005. WWF supports market research, including annual ...
[34]
Illegal wildlife trade has become one of the 'world's largest criminal ...
Nov 6, 2023 · With the black market for illegal wildlife products worth up to USD 20 billion per year, poaching and the illegal wildlife trade has become a ...<|separator|>
[35]
Trading in Endangered Species: Legal Sales Versus Total Bans
Jun 27, 2003 · Traditional economic theory says that selling confiscated goods helps satisfy consumer demand and drive down prices, thus reducing the financial ...
[36]
Mapping the African Bushmeat Crisis | Earth.Org
Nov 17, 2020 · Approximately 4,5-4,9 million tonnes of bushmeat are harvested in Sub-Saharan Africa yearly, from 500 different species of which 91 are ...
[37]
Eating Eden to Extinction: Understanding Africa's Bushmeat Crisis
Sep 1, 2022 · Recent reports estimate as much as 5 million tons of bushmeat are harvested annually across the Congo Basin alone for local consumption and sale ...
[38]
Bushmeat hunting: The greatest threat to Africa's wildlife? - Mongabay
Oct 26, 2020 · Estimates for the Congo Basin range from 1 million to 4 million tons of bushmeat consumed every year, with both these figures considered an ...Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
[39]
Bushmeat use is widespread but under-researched in rural ...
Bushmeat consumption is common, with typically between 30 and 60% of rural households in the communal tenure regions stating that they consume it.Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
[40]
[PDF] Poverty, Poaching and Trafficking:
Subsistence poaching is characterised by low technology (e.g. use of traps and snares) and tends to have a minimal impact on wildlife populations (Mackenzie, ...
[41]
Poachers and Poverty: Assessing Objective and Subjective... - LWW
This study uses a unique sample of 173 self-admitted poachers living in villages adjacent to Ruaha National Park in Tanzania to explore the influence of poverty ...
[42]
[PDF] Understanding the drivers of subsistence poaching in the Great ...
The main objective of this study is to contribute to this scanty literature by examining the factors that are correlated to subsistence poaching in the Great ...
[43]
Bushmeat and Emerging Infectious Diseases: Lessons from Africa
The importance of bushmeat in household economies varies across sites and individual hunting households, ranging from 38 % to more than 90 % of the total cash ...
[44]
“Snares” – the world's most common poaching method
SNARE – a trap for catching animals, typically one having a noose made of wire or cord. One of the most common and devastating poaching techniques used ...Missing: spears | Show results with:spears
[45]
Snares: Low-tech, low-profile killers of rare wildlife the world over
Aug 18, 2022 · Snares are simple, low-tech, noose-like traps that can be made from cheap and easily accessible materials such as wire, rope or brake cables.Missing: spears | Show results with:spears
[46]
Snaring and wildlife wastage in Africa: drivers, scale, impacts, and ...
Apr 9, 2025 · A snare is a type of trap. Specifically, it is a noose that is placed in an area frequented by wildlife and tied to an anchor, often a tree, ...Missing: spears | Show results with:spears
[47]
The Devastating Impact of Poaching on Wildlife Populations and Ec
Poaching methods vary depending on the species targeted and the motivations of the poachers involved. Common methods include the use of traps, snares, and ...
[48]
Tracking snares to mitigate the threat to wildlife: Quantification of ...
We observed snaring was the common hunting method used by local poachers in the landscape with detection rate of 0.32 ±0.23 per km. •. We provided participants ...
[49]
A Poacher's Progress | The British Newspaper Archive Blog
Jun 13, 2019 · One type of fish poaching was known as 'stanking,' where a deep hole was dug in the river bed, thus disconnecting it from the rest of the river.
[50]
Poaching Detection Technologies—A Survey - PMC - PubMed Central
May 8, 2018 · We describe poaching detection technologies in four domains: perimeter based, ground based, aerial based, and animal tagging based technologies.
[51]
7 High-Tech Tools to Combat Poaching - Treehugger
Park rangers and governments are struggling to battle almost mafia-like gangs that use helicopters, night-vision goggles and high-powered rifles to take down ...Missing: modern | Show results with:modern
[52]
[PDF] KEY ACTORS, ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURES AND BUSINESS ...
In source, transit and destination countries, various actors are involved to facilitate wildlife trafficking: poachers or hunters that obtain wildlife in source ...
[53]
Wildlife, Forest & Fisheries Crime Module 1 Key Issues: Perpetrators ...
Wildlife trafficking involves a range of actors involved in poaching, trapping, harvesting, supplying, trading, selling, possessing, and consuming wild animals.Perpetrators And Their... · Organized Criminal Groups · Corporate Sector
[54]
Organized Crime & Criminal Syndicates - Poaching Facts
Small-scale and regional-level syndicates run poaching and trafficking operations on the ground and pay poachers and couriers a modest amount for acquiring the ...Botswana · Czech Republic · South Africa
[55]
Exposing the Hydra - EIA Reports
Structure: The Vietnamese-led wildlife crime syndicates active in Africa conform to a loose hierarchical structure of roles and responsibilities. Poaching and ...
[56]
Pushing Ivory Out of Africa: A Case Study from the Field
Jul 19, 2015 · Elephant poaching and ivory trafficking syndicates do not always use a hierarchical 'kingpin' chain-of-command model. These non-hierarchical ...
[57]
Species at Risk - AZA.org
The annual poaching mortality rate has dropped from an estimated peak of over 10% in 2011 to approximately 5% today. We are still losing elephants faster than ...Missing: key | Show results with:key
[58]
15 Most Poached Animals In 2025 | IFAW
Oct 6, 2025 · Discover which animals are most affected by poaching in 2025, including lions, apes, African grey parrots, poison dart frogs, and more.
[59]
Poaching Statistics 2025 – Global Facts, Trends & Impact
Aug 29, 2024 · Poaching for rhino horn is the biggest threat to all five rhino species. ... The number has jumped to 56, as the demand for tiger parts, like bone ...
[60]
[PDF] TOP 10 MOST WANTED - Traffic.org
Poaching and illegal trade of bears, driven largely by the demand for bile used in traditional medicine and folk remedies continues unabated across Asia on a ...Missing: derived | Show results with:derived
[61]
The poachers and the treasures of the deep: diving for abalone in ...
Aug 19, 2018 · The annual illicit catch exceeds 3,000 tonnes, averaging eight tonnes every single day. The legal catch, set by the South African government, is ...
[62]
The Online Trade in high-value marine products from South Africa
Jun 18, 2024 · High value marine products such as shark fins, sea cucumbers, seahorses, fish maw, and abalone are being traded on major online platforms in South Africa.
[63]
China-linked wildlife poaching and trafficking in Mexico | Brookings
Mar 8, 2022 · Among the species poached in Mexico and smuggled to China, sometimes via the United States, are reptiles, sea cucumbers, totoaba, abalone, ...
[64]
[PDF] Rhino Horn Report - African Wildlife Foundation
The illegal wildlife trade is estimated to be worth over $10 billion (USD) per year and has drastically reduced many wildlife populations around the world.
[65]
Poaching Facts
Wildlife Trafficking & Criminal Profits · Most poachers and African criminal syndicates receive only 5-10% of the retail value for the animal parts they poach.
[66]
[PDF] Supply and value chains and illicit financial flows from the trade in ...
The illegal supply chain for ivory and rhino horn describes the processes and actors involved in sourcing, manufacturing, trafficking and selling products to ...
[67]
Visualizing corruption risks in the illegal rhino horn trade supply chain
This guide demonstrates areas along the rhino horn supply chain that are most vulnerable to corruption and identifies feasible entry points for ...
[68]
[PDF] The Rapid Growth in the Industrial Scale Trafficking of Pangolin Scales
Nigeria and Vietnam play prominent roles in the supply chain. Between 2016 – 2019, they were linked to almost 70% of pangolin scale seizures, which amounted to ...
[69]
(PDF) Rhino Horn - ResearchGate
Aug 24, 2025 · Rhino horn prices crash in 2020 after steady declines since 2016. • Poached rhino horn increasingly replaced by stockpile horn in the supply ...
[70]
The billion dollar ivory illusion | Good Governance Africa
Jun 27, 2024 · Current ivory prices are around US$400/kg in illicit markets in the East and averaging about $92/kg across Africa (except for Nigeria which has now become the ...
[71]
[PDF] An analysis of pangolin scale and ivory trafficking, 2015-2024
At the demand side of the supply chain in Asia, the average value of pangolin scales also dropped by approximately one third between 2016 and 2017, but then ...
[72]
Synthetic rhino horns could alter black market - World Finance
Wild horn on the black market can cost anywhere between $30,000 and $100,000 per kg. That is why Pembient is targeting a wholesale price in the region of $7,000 ...
[73]
[PDF] Combat Illegal Wildlife Trade 2010–2023 - The World Bank
trafficking and illicit supply chains, and stem demand in consumer markets. Latest assessments of illegal wildlife trade data show positive impacts of this.
[74]
[PDF] World Wildlife Crime Report 2024
May 8, 2024 · The present report covers trends in the illicit wildlife trade, analyses harms and impacts, probes driving factors, and takes stock of responses ...
[75]
What is the effect of poaching activity on wildlife species? - PubMed
We found that the probability of local extinction was highest in sites with poaching activity for golden monkey and bushbuck.
[76]
What is the effect of poaching activity on wildlife species? - Moore
Jul 1, 2021 · We found that the probability of local extinction was highest in sites with poaching activity for golden monkey and bushbuck.
[77]
Poaching numbers | Conservation - Save the Rhino International
In 2024, 420 rhinos were killed in South Africa, a welcome decrease of more than 15% compared to 2023. Yet organised crime remains a significant threat to ...Missing: tiger | Show results with:tiger
[78]
Poaching of African rhinos down - but drought and other ... - IUCN
Aug 7, 2025 · Population growth and poaching decrease masks losses in Africa · Slight increase in Asian rhinos thanks to targeted protection, but more ...
[79]
Predicting the consequences of subsistence poaching on the ...
We found that the lion population increased by 40 % with reductions in lethal poaching pressure of 50 %. When we removed lethal poaching pressure entirely, the ...2. Material And Methods · 2.1. Study Area · 4. Discussion
[80]
[PDF] Ecological consequences of forest elephant declines for Afrotropical ...
Elephant decline will alter forest composition, reduce seed dispersal, increase tree density, and may make Central African forests more like Neotropical ...
[81]
[PDF] Elephants in the understory: opposing direct and indirect effects of ...
Elephants engineer African savanna ecosystems by toppling trees and breaking branches, and although their negative effects on trees are well documented, their ...
[82]
Gone one, gone all: Without Africa's large herbivores, a woody vine ...
Sep 27, 2021 · When herbivores were excluded, lianas rapidly increased in number and size, smothering trees and stunting their growth and reproduction, the ...Missing: vegetation | Show results with:vegetation
[83]
[PDF] Collapse of the world's largest herbivores
May 1, 2015 · Loss of large herbivores can have cascading effects on other species including large carnivores, scavengers, mesoherbivores, small mammals, and ...<|separator|>
[84]
[PDF] Rhino poaching may cause atypical trophic cascades
We hypothesize that such cascades could result not only in the loss of other populations of endangered species but also in changes in vegetation structure and ...
[85]
Scientists' warning to humanity on illegal or unsustainable wildlife ...
Overharvesting of wildlife can lead to disrupted interspecific interactions and ecosystem structure, altering species composition, functioning and services such ...Scientists' Warning To... · 2. Impacts On The Target... · Acknowledgements<|control11|><|separator|>
[86]
[PDF] Poachers and Poverty: Assessing Objective and Subjective ...
This study uses a unique sample of 173 self-admitted poachers living in villages adjacent to Ruaha National Park in Tanzania to explore the influence of poverty ...Missing: dependency | Show results with:dependency
[87]
[PDF] Empty forests, empty stomachs? Bushmeat and livelihoods in the ...
Here we assess the consequences, both for ecosystems and local livelihoods, of the loss of these species in the Amazon and Congo basins. Keywords: bushmeat, ...Missing: poaching | Show results with:poaching
[88]
The Economic Impact of Illegal Wildlife Trade in Southern Africa
IWT generates $7-23B yearly, undermines economic prosperity. Namibia spends $17M to stop IWT, with $350M loss if stopped, and $260M gain if curbed.
[89]
[PDF] Economic drivers and effects of the illegal wildlife trade in Sub ...
Jun 16, 2017 · Main economic drivers include increasing demand in East Asia, poverty, lack of livelihoods, and cultural legacies. Effects vary, with short- ...
[90]
The real costs of illegal logging, fishing and wildlife trade: $1 trillion ...
Oct 29, 2019 · The annual cost of these illegal activities at a staggering $1 trillion to $2 trillion. More than 90 percent of these losses are from ecosystem services.
[91]
Global Wildlife Program - World Bank
The estimated economic losses due to illegal logging, fishing, and wildlife trade are $1 trillion–$2 trillion per year—with more than 90 percent of these ...<|separator|>
[92]
Despite Progress, Illegal Catch Continues to Reach the Market
Aug 2, 2023 · Researchers estimate that at least 1 in 5 fish caught globally are caught illegally, with a total cost to coastal nations between US $10 billion and $23 ...
[93]
Pacific countries: data sharing can drive down IUU fishing
Jan 10, 2024 · Illegal, unreported and unregulated (IUU) fishing harms coastal communities, impacts ... estimated annual global economic toll of $26-$50 billion.
[94]
Global wildlife tourism generates five times more revenue than ...
In 2018, wildlife tourism directly contributed $120.1bn to global GDP, versus the $23bn in revenue attributed to the illegal trade in wildlife, or 5.2 times ...
[95]
Estimating economic losses to tourism in Africa from the illegal ...
Nov 1, 2016 · An ongoing elephant poaching crisis is threatening not only elephant populations but also the local economies that rely on nature-based tourism.
[96]
Responsible Rhino Tourism | Save the Rhino International
Dec 11, 2018 · In 2006-14, rhino poaching caused total annual losses to tourism revenue in South Africa, Namibia, Kenya and Zimbabwe of between €205.76 ...
[97]
Forestry crime - Interpol
The trade of illegally logged timber has an estimated value of between USD 51-152 billion annually, representing a major loss in tax revenues.
[98]
Illegal logging and deforestation: money does grow on trees
Jul 27, 2021 · It also highlighted information from 2019 which put estimates of lost global tax revenue from just illegal logging alone at $6 billion to $9 ...
[99]
The Cost of Wildlife Crime: Why Investing in Anti-Poaching Pays Off
Feb 14, 2025 · For elephants, DSWT has estimated that a single living elephant can generate upwards of USD $1.6 million in tourism revenue (through safaris, ...
[100]
The cost of knowing what will stop wildlife trafficking
Apr 22, 2025 · Since 2010, most funding has supported protected area management to prevent poaching (e.g., 40% of cumulative funds from 2010 to 2017) (The ...
[101]
[PDF] Cost-Benefit Analysis of Curbing Illegal Wildlife Trade
In this case study, the cost-benefit analysis provides insights into the economic justification of investing in the fight against IWT in Namibia. As poaching ...
[102]
What is CITES?
CITES (the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora) is an international agreement between governments.
[103]
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild ...
International co-operation is essential for the protection of certain species of wild fauna and flora against over-exploitation through international trade.Missing: poaching | Show results with:poaching
[104]
Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild ...
May 28, 2024 · CITES is an international agreement, signed by 184 parties in 1973, designed to ensure that international trade in animals and plants does not threaten their ...How Cites Works · 19th Meeting Of The... · Marine Species In Cites<|separator|>
[105]
What is CITES? International laws protecting wild animals | IFAW
Mar 10, 2025 · CITES is an international agreement between national governments around the globe to regulate the trade in wild animals and plants to ensure it ...
[106]
International Wildlife Law: Protecting Global Biodiversity
Oct 14, 2024 · Key International Treaties and Agreements · Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES) · Convention ...
[107]
Wildlife Trade and Law Enforcement: A Proposal for a Remodeling ...
Wildlife trade is regulated through the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), a convention that includes most ...
[108]
Laws that Protect Animals - Animal Legal Defense Fund
The Lacey Act: Enacted in 1900, the Lacey Act bans illegal wildlife trafficking. ... Each of the 50 states now has a felony animal cruelty law on the books.
[109]
Wildlife poachers in Kenya 'to face death penalty' | The Independent
Apr 12, 2019 · “We have in place the Wildlife Conservation Act that was enacted in 2013 and which fetches offenders a life sentence or a fine of US$200,000,” ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[110]
What is the punishment for poachers in Africa? - Quora
Mar 26, 2021 · The country in question is fairly stable and has harsher punishments for poachers. Mozambique, for instance, has very mild punishments for poaching. It's only ...What is the penalty imposed for poaching in South Africa? It would ...Do you think stricter penalties should be imposed on those involved ...More results from www.quora.com
[111]
Penalties for Poaching (Namibia) - Save the Elephants
Aug 31, 2017 · One of the actions taken by the Namibian authorities to deal with the increase in poaching was to amend the penalty provisions under the Nature ...
[112]
Wildlife Poaching and Insecurity in Africa - CSIS
Jul 14, 2015 · Only southern Africa is experiencing elephant poaching below true crisis levels, but as populations elsewhere are hunted to extinction, this ...
[113]
Poaching by Country 2025 - World Population Review
Most agree Zimbabwe has the largest poaching problem - over 100 rhinos are killed each year for their horns. Kenya is infamous for its giraffe hunting for their ...Missing: species | Show results with:species
[114]
Environmental Crimes and Arrests Statistics | PoachingFacts
Only 56 countries had a maximum penalty of four or fewer years and 51 countries went unreported (page 26). Failure to impose stiff penalties for detrimental ...
[115]
[PDF] LAW enForCement on iLLegAL WiLdLiFe trAde: WhAt Works?
Sep 16, 2024 · This paper examines approaches for anti-poaching and anti- trafficking in order to make recommendations on how wildlife law enforcement in ...Missing: variations | Show results with:variations
[116]
SMART: Using Data to Prevent Poaching - Panthera.org
In order to be effective, these law enforcement patrols need to be coordinated and monitored. "Anti-poaching scouts performing SMART training exercise, Sioma, ...Missing: surveillance | Show results with:surveillance
[117]
The rising tide of conservation technology: empowering the fight ...
Camera traps, acoustic sensors, and tracking devices help detect and deter poaching activities (Kamminga et al., 2018). Mobile apps and data analysis tools ...
[118]
Emerging Technologies in Wildlife Conservation - Husson University
Aug 5, 2025 · From drones that deter poaching to AI models that predict ecological changes before they happen, today's tools are shaping a smarter, faster and ...
[119]
How Technology is Protecting Africa's Wildlife: AI, Drones, and ...
Aug 28, 2025 · These drones identify poachers faster and with greater accuracy, enabling rangers to intercept them quickly.
[120]
Drones and AI-Driven Solutions for Wildlife Monitoring - MDPI
Drones provide access to remote and dangerous habitats, while AI unlocks the potential to process vast amounts of wildlife data. This synergy is reshaping ...
[121]
Tackling Wildlife Crime with AI and Satellite Connectivity - Cow-shed
Feb 3, 2025 · A ZSL-led project combining AI camera traps with satellite connectivity. Designed for remote areas, it filters threat images in real time and alerts rangers.
[122]
How Gunshot Detection Can Safeguard Wildlife - CGIT
Mar 13, 2025 · ... technology enhances the effectiveness of anti-poaching operations. Deterrent for Future Poaching or Gaming Events. The presence of advanced ...
[123]
Using AI and satellites to combat poaching of endangered species
Oct 28, 2021 · Archangel Imaging is using satellite communications and artificial intelligence (AI) to tackle wildlife poaching in protected areas and national parks.
[124]
Explained: How technology can protect the world's wildlife
In Sumatra's Kerinci Seblat National Park, SMART technology has played a vital role in anti-poaching, biological monitoring and community engagement activities ...
[125]
Tracking wildlife poaching with remote monitoring - Upstream Tech
Aug 12, 2025 · With advanced analysis tools and a library of commercial satellite sources to choose from, Lens makes it possible to monitor poaching activities ...
[126]
https://www.futuredatastats.com/anti-poaching-sensors-market
[127]
SANDF has interdicted 200 poachers in the Kruger over the last ...
May 9, 2018 · According to SANParks, 504 rhinos and 67 elephants were killed due to poaching in the KNP in 2017, indicating the rhino poaching rate has ...
[128]
Rhino poaching rises sharply in South Africa, authorities say - WTOK
Feb 11, 2022 · New figures show that in the past decade, Kruger National Park lost around 70% of its white rhino, mostly to poaching. “What is the consequence ...
[129]
Green Militarization: Anti-Poaching Efforts and the Spatial Contours ...
Soldiers deployed in Kruger, in what has been named Operation Rhino, work in conjunction with Kruger's rangers—as Joint Forces—on anti-poaching patrols and ...
[130]
The Problem with Green Militarization: The need to explore peaceful ...
Jan 1, 2025 · Militarized anti-poaching leads to human rights abuses and further marginalization and requires alternative approaches to address these issues.
[131]
Facts and Figures - Community Conservation Namibia
Privately owned conservancies on farmland account for 6.1% of Namibia. The total land available to wildlife is around 45.6% of Namibia.
[132]
Wildlife Populations - Community Conservation Namibia
This was initially most evident in Namibia's north-west, where wildlife had been reduced to small numbers through drought and poaching by the early 1980s. It is ...
[133]
Community-Based Approaches to Tackling Illegal Wildlife Trade ...
Oct 27, 2021 · Our study suggests that community-based anti-poaching interventions are more likely to be considered effective in reducing IWT based on the ...
[134]
Engaging local communities in tackling illegal wildlife trade
Apr 9, 2019 · Out of the 50 case studies we identified, 70% (n = 35) included some mechanism for generating positive incentives for community-based ...
[135]
[PDF] Do Wildlife Trade Bans Enhance or Undermine Conservation Efforts?
International wildlife trade bans can undermine conservation by increasing black market prices, while national bans combined with CITES can decrease trade.
[136]
Trade bans: a perfect storm for poaching? - BioOne Complete
Sep 17, 2012 · These forces include 1) inelastic demand and high profit potential, 2) long history of trade, both legal and illegal, coupled with strong ...
[137]
The effectiveness of interventions to manage international wildlife ...
Sep 4, 2024 · Severely overexploited oyster populations failed to recover even after 15 years with an export ban; the slow recruitment of the species may have ...
[138]
Trophy Hunting – A Complex Picture - Conservation Frontlines
Since hunting was banned in Botswana, the boreholes that hunters paid for have dried up and poaching has reportedly increased. Poaching takes a far greater toll ...<|separator|>
[139]
Sustainable Use: How Putting a Value on Wildlife Can Save It - WRSA
Sep 29, 2025 · The evidence is clear: South Africa's sustainable use model works. It has restored habitats, revived species from the brink, and empowered ...
[140]
The sustainable use approach could save South Africa's rhinos
Through bold policy experiments that sought to maximise the value of wildlife to landholders, wildlife in southern Africa recovered against great odds. This ...
[141]
Sustainable Trophy Hunting Vital for South African Communities and ...
Sep 2, 2025 · This article, published by Wildlife Ranching South Africa, discusses how sustainable trophy hunting is vital to communities and conservation ...
[142]
Private management of African protected areas improves wildlife ...
Protected areas can conserve wildlife and benefit people when managed effectively. African governments increasingly delegate the management of protected ...
[143]
What We Do - CAMPFIRE Association
CAMPFIRE helps to protect 50,000 km2, protecting three to five million hectares of wildlife habitat (12.7% of the country). The programme operates in 58 ...<|separator|>
[144]
Shoot an Elephant, Save a Community - Hoover Institution
Jun 6, 2011 · Ten years after the program began, wildlife populations had increased by 50 percent. By 2003, elephant numbers had doubled from 4,000 to 8,000.<|separator|>
[145]
Politicizing Conservation: The Zimbabwe Elephant Conundrum
As noted by USAID, one hallmark of CAMPFIRE's success is the doubling of elephant numbers in program areas from 4,000 to 8,000 individuals. This success has ...
[146]
[PDF] ROLE OF TROPHY HUNTING OF ELEPHANT IN SUPPORT OF THE ...
Aug 25, 2021 · The US suspension of ivory imports from Zimbabwe has had a significant impact on CAMPFIRE, and resulted in the cancellation of 108 out of ...
[147]
Private game reserves are vital for conservation - Africa Geographic
May 23, 2017 · Private reserves have more conservation land than national parks, act as vital wildlife corridors, and have rescued species from extinction.
[148]
Rhino poaching on the rise in South Africa, new figures show
Feb 28, 2024 · "During 2023, 499 rhinos were poached across South Africa, 406 were killed on state properties and 93 on privately owned parks/reserves/farms," ...
[149]
Systematic review of the impact of restrictive wildlife trade measures ...
Apr 5, 2024 · Illegal exploitation of black rhinoceros and elephant populations: Patterns of decline, law enforcement and patrol effort in Luangwa Valley ...Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
[150]
Does the CAMPFIRE programme ensure economic benefits from ...
About 3% of surveyed households felt that CAMPFIRE contributed to a reduction in human-wildlife conflicts. Both direct and indirect benefits deteriorated after ...
[151]
195 Rhinos Lost To Poachers In First Half Of 2025
The greatest losses were once again on State owned land, with 63% of the total poaching. The numbers so far are comparable with the same period in 2024, ...
[152]
Rhino horn trafficking today: Intelligence insights and emerging trends
Sep 18, 2025 · Rhino horn trafficking is a form of organised crime, with sophisticated transnational networks linking poaching in Africa to consumer markets in ...Missing: variations | Show results with:variations
[153]
Pandemic-era slump in ivory and pangolin scale trafficking persists ...
Jun 17, 2025 · In 2024, the number of large pangolin seizures was 84% below the 2019 peak. The report attributes this continued reduction to stronger, better- ...Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
[154]
[PDF] UNEP:Poaching of Endangered Animals in Asia
Dec 8, 2024 · Rhino poaching has been and still is an issue worldwide, but especially in Asian ... "India becoming global tiger poaching hotspot." DW, Nov. 2022 ...<|separator|>
[155]
World Pangolin Day 2025: World's most trafficked mammal loses ...
Feb 19, 2025 · On World Pangolin Day, it is reported that globally, one pangolin is poached every three minutes either for illegal bushmeat use or to supply scales to the ...Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
[156]
[PDF] 2024 World Pangolin Day
Over 160,000 lbs of pangolin scales have been seized by authorities in the past five years. This amount equates to an estimated 800,000 pangolins poached ...
[157]
Annual Report 2024 - Global Fishing Watch
A 2024 study led by the University of Washington published in Science leveraged Global Fishing Watch data to find that fewer than 7 percent of global hotspots ...Missing: statistics | Show results with:statistics
[158]
A troubling tide: The problem of illegal fishing and declining catch
Jul 9, 2025 · The Philippines is grappling with a mounting crisis in its fisheries sector as illegal, unreported, and unregulated (IUU) fishing continues to surge.
[159]
Wildlife Trafficking: Why battling this illicit trade is crucial - ICE
Aug 21, 2025 · Illicit wildlife trafficking is estimated to be between $7.8 billion and $10 billion per year, and illegal timber trade is estimated as much as ...
[160]
Surviving but stalling: New report highlights urgent need for holistic ...
Aug 8, 2025 · Concerningly, 2025 has seen what appears to be an increase in rhino poaching. South Africa lost 91 rhinos in the first three months of 2025 ...Missing: hotspots methods
[161]
The hidden dimension of poaching: A novel survey method shows ...
A novel survey method shows that local demand for pets largely outnumbers domestic and international trade of neotropical parrots.Missing: emerging | Show results with:emerging
[162]
[PDF] Emerging technologies to combat poaching
Sep 14, 2024 · Pin Board Traps – This method utilizes a large board covered with numerous iron nails and positions it on the path to kill an animal. Page 3 ...
[163]
EU remains major wildlife trafficking hub, report finds - Mongabay
Jun 23, 2025 · The report also highlighted emerging trends, including the first-time seizure of 88 species in 2023 within the 2017–2023 assessment period.Missing: poaching | Show results with:poaching<|separator|>
[164]
DoFPS Launches Zero Poaching Strategy to end Wildlife Crime
Aug 8, 2025 · First, it calls for improved data gathering on poaching trends, using tools like SMART (Spatial Monitoring and Reporting Tool) patrolling, and ...
[165]
The National Police Association Backs the Wildlife Confiscations ...
The National Police Association Backs the Wildlife Confiscations Network Act of 2025. Indianapolis – June 20, 2025. Illegal wildlife trafficking ...Missing: poaching international
[166]
ICCWC supported 124 countries in 2024 to strengthen global action ...
Sep 30, 2025 · Disrupting transnational wildlife trafficking networks. A network ... international trade in over 40,900 species of wild animals and plants.Missing: policy poaching
[167]
2024 END Wildlife Trafficking Strategic Review - State Department
Mar 20, 2025 · All Focus Countries are Parties to the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES). Obstacles to ...Strengthen Enforcement · Overseas Activity · Expand International...<|separator|>
[168]
[PDF] A/79/L.96 - General Assembly
Jun 18, 2025 · first session on the global status of illicit trafficking in wildlife, including poaching and illegal trade, taking into account the trends ...
[169]
New global guidelines needed to rein in the wildlife pet trade ...
Oct 7, 2025 · A key motion under consideration at the upcoming IUCN World Conservation Congress would create guidelines for managing the wildlife pet ...