] In the summer of 2015, American dentist Walter Palmer went into hiding.

Thousands
of angry strangers were sending him and his family threatening messages vía social
media. Protestors appeared outside his office and home, waving signs calling him an
evil
murderer. What did Palmer do to set off this frestorm of negative attention? He
went
trophy hunting.

More specifically. Palmer participated in a hunting trip in the African country of

Zimbabwe, during which he killed a lion. At the time, Palmer was unaware that the
lion
was a popular attraction at the nearby Hwange National Park, a protected game
reserve. Nicknamed “Cecil,” he 13-year-old lion was beloved by tourists for its
unusual
black mane and camera friendly personality. Palmer also didn't know that Cecil was
the
subject of a9-year wildife conservation study run by Oxford University and wore a
GPS
collar that tracked' ts movements.
Palmer, an avid big game hunter, spent
$54.000 to hire local professional
guides and to obtain a government
hunting permit. After the guides
illgally lured the lion out of the
national park and onto private land,
Palmer killed it, keeping the head and
skin as a trophy. When news spread
of Cecil's death, animal lovers across
the world were outraged. The ethics
of trophy hunting became a source of
intense international debate.

Advocates insist that trophy hunting

can bring long-term benefits for
widlfe. For example, it's estimated that sport hunters spend over 2.9 billion
dollars
every year on permits and fees. This revenue can be used to fund conservation
programs, establish national parks, and fight poachers who kil endangered animals
ilegally. Supporters also argue that the promise of income from hunters can
motivate
local landowners to support, rather than kill, endangered wildife. When South
Africa
legalized the hunting of white rhinos, landowners reintroduced the species onto
their
properties, helping to increase the population from fewer than 100 to more than
11,000. Hunters also point out that they target only the largest animals—often
males
thatare too old to reproduce. Removing these aggressive senior males can give
younger
males more access to the females, and more opportunities for the population to
grow.

However, opponents of trophy hunting dispute these claims, arguing that lite of the
revenue generated by hunting is actually used for conservation. Rather, the money
often
disappears into the pockets of corrupt government official Critics also point out
that
responsible nature tourism generates significantly more revenue than trophy hunting
Studies from nine African countries show that hunting amounts to less than 2% of
the
total tourism revenue, a fact which clearly ilustrates that tourists visit African
countries
to see and photograph wildife, not kill. Furthermore, these reports estimate that
only
3% of hunting revenue actually makes it back to the local communities where the
hunting takes place. Finally. many animal lovers believe that it is our
responsibility to
protect endangered wildife and that it's unethical to allow rich hunters to kil
rare and
beautiful animas for sport.

While Walter Palmer claims to regret kiling Cecil the lin, it's clear that trophy
hunting
has become a controversial issue. Do we need to kill animals in order to save them?
With strong opinions on both sides, the debate wil lkely continue.