Advert
Advert – scroll down
The Department of Forestry, Fisheries and the Environment (DFFE), under Minister Aucamp, has published a notice of intention to set and allocate the 2026 and 2027 CITES export quotas for elephant, black rhinoceros, and leopard hunting trophies.
The proposed annual quotas for both 2026 and 2027 are as follows:
-
- Elephant: A quota of 300 tusks, derived from no more than 150 individual elephants. The DFFE states the national wild population is approximately 43,681 and growing at 5.5% annually, making an offtake of 0.35% to 0.7% sustainable.
- Black Rhinoceros: A quota of 12 hunting trophies (allocated as 3 D.b. bicornis, 8 D.b. minor, and 1 D.b. michaeli ). The DFFE notes this complies with CITES resolutions allowing an export of up to 0.5% of the population of each subspecies to incentivise habitat protection and remove surplus males.
- Leopard: A quota of 11 leopard hunting trophies. These are limited to 11 specific designated zones across KwaZulu-Natal, Limpopo, Mpumalanga, and the North West. Hunting is restricted to male leopards 7 years of age or older in areas with stable or increasing populations.
click the link for more info, or scroll down to have your say
Have your say – shape the paper.
Perspectives: What is the debate?
The Core Debate: Conservation vs. Ethics
The proposed quotas highlight a deep and ongoing national dispute regarding how South Africa manages, values, and protects its wildlife.
Proponents of the quotas argue that South Africa’s conservation success relies heavily on the private wildlife model. By giving high-value species like elephants, rhinos, and leopards an economic value through strictly regulated trophy hunting, private landowners and reserves are financially incentivised to conserve vast tracts of natural habitat and tolerate dangerous game. The substantial revenue generated from these hunts is cited as a critical funding source for anti-poaching units, habitat management, and rural community development. Without this financial incentive, proponents warn that these animals become costly liabilities, risking habitat loss as land is converted to agriculture or livestock farming.
Opponents argue that killing sentient, vulnerable, or critically endangered animals for sport is ethically unjustifiable and contradicts South Africa’s global image as a premier eco-tourism destination. Critics frequently challenge the economic claims of the hunting industry, pointing to studies suggesting that only a fraction of hunting revenues actually reaches local communities or grassroots conservation efforts. Furthermore, animal welfare and conservation NGOs argue that targeting prime males disrupts genetic diversity and complex social structures. They advocate for non-consumptive alternatives, such as photographic safaris, which they argue generate more sustainable, long-term economic benefits without the ecological and moral costs of trophy hunting.
Adding to the complexity is a recent history of fierce legal battles. Quotas for these specific species were largely stalled between 2022 and 2025 due to court challenges from animal welfare groups, who argued that the Department lacked up-to-date scientific data (Non-Detriment Findings) and proper public consultation to justify the numbers. Conversely, the hunting and wildlife ranching industry has actively sued the government over these same delays, arguing that the prolonged absence of quotas has crippled vital conservation funding and rural livelihoods.
-
- Conservation Funding: Trophy hunting generates significant, vital revenue that is directly reinvested into anti-poaching operations, habitat maintenance, and wildlife ranching programmes.
- Habitat Protection: Allowing a financial return on dangerous game incentivises private landowners to keep their land wild and populated with these species, rather than converting it to agriculture or commercial developments.
- Population Management: Targeted hunting acts as a population management tool, particularly for elephants whose growing numbers can devastate local ecosystems and biodiversity if left unchecked.
- Removing Surplus Males: Harvesting older, surplus male rhinos or leopards can boost population growth rates by reducing competition and territorial killings of younger, breeding males.
- Strict Regulation: The quotas are heavily regulated, science-based, and comply with strict international CITES frameworks.
-
- Conservation Status: Leopards are listed as “Vulnerable” on the IUCN Red List, and black rhinos remain critically endangered globally; permitting hunting of these species sends a contradictory message regarding their conservation.
- Eco-Tourism Alternatives: South Africa’s wildlife is worth more alive than dead. Photographic safaris and eco-tourism generate more sustainable, long-term employment and revenue than the extractive trophy hunting industry.
- Cruelty and Ethics: Trophy hunting is an outdated, cruel practice driven by ego rather than genuine, modern conservation needs.
- Enforcement Flaws: The mechanisms for monitoring hunts in the field (such as ensuring a leopard is strictly a male over 7 years old) are incredibly difficult to enforce, leading to potential abuses of the quota system.
- Ecosystem Disruption: Removing dominant males can cause chaos within social structures, leading to infanticide (especially in leopards) and an increase in human-wildlife conflict.