Hubbry Logo
BushmeatBushmeatMain
Open search
Bushmeat
Community hub
Bushmeat
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Contribute something
Bushmeat
Bushmeat
Bushmeat
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
Bushmeat
Bushmeat seen on the roadside in Ghana: includes dried cane rat, giant pouched rat, and red-flanked duiker.
Alternative namesWild meat, wild game
Main ingredientsWildlife
  •   Media: Bushmeat

Bushmeat is meat from wildlife hunted for human consumption, specifically in parts of Africa, Asia, and South America. Bushmeat is commonly harvested through unregulated or subsistence hunting practices. Bushmeat often consists of local small mammals in an area, such as primates, bats, and rodents, but can also refer to small birds and reptiles.

In a public health context, bushmeat is of concern due to its association with the transmission of zoonotic diseases such as Ebola and HIV, as well as other emerging infectious diseases linked to the handling, butchering, and consumption of wild animals.[1][2][3] Bushmeat represents a primary source of animal protein and a cash-earning commodity in poor and rural communities of humid tropical forest regions of the world.[4][5]

The numbers of animals killed and traded as bushmeat in 1994 in West and Central Africa were thought to be unsustainable.[6] By 2005, commercial harvesting and trading of bushmeat was considered a threat to biodiversity.[7] As of 2016, 301 terrestrial mammals were threatened with extinction due to hunting for bushmeat including non-human primates, even-toed ungulates, bats, diprotodont marsupials, rodents and carnivores occurring in developing countries.[8]

Nomenclature

[edit]

The term 'bushmeat' is originally an African term for wildlife species that are hunted for human consumption,[5] and usually refers specifically to the meat of African wildlife.[9] In October 2000, the IUCN World Conservation Congress passed a resolution on the unsustainable commercial trade in wild meat. Affected countries were urged to recognize the increasing ramifications of the bushmeat trade, to strengthen and enforce legislation, and to develop action programmes to mitigate the consequences of the trade. Donor organisations were requested to provide funding for the implementation of such programmes.[10]

Wildlife hunting for food is important for the livelihood security of and supply of dietary protein for poor people. It can be sustainable when carried out by traditional hunter-gatherers in large landscapes for their own consumption. Due to the extent of bushmeat hunting for trade in markets, the survival of those species that are large-bodied and reproduce slowly is threatened. The term bushmeat crisis was coined in 2007 and refers to this dual threat of depleting food resources and wildlife extinctions, both entailed by the bushmeat trade.[5]

Affected wildlife species

[edit]

Globally, more than 1,000 animal species are estimated to be affected by hunting for bushmeat.[4] Bushmeat hunters use mostly leg-hold snare traps to catch any wildlife, but prefer to kill large species, as these provide a greater amount of meat than small species.[11]

Pangolin in Cameroon
Gambian pouched rat in Cameroon
Bushmeat in Gabon

The volume of the bushmeat trade in West and Central Africa was estimated at 1–5 million tonnes (980,000–4,920,000 long tons; 1,100,000–5,500,000 short tons) per year at the turn of the 21st century.[12] In 2002, it was estimated that species weighing more than 10 kg (22 lb) contribute 177.7 ± 358.4 kg/km2 (1,015 ± 2,046 lb/sq mi) of meat per year to the bushmeat extracted in the Congo Basin, based on 24 individuals. Species weighing less than 10 kg (22 lb) were estimated to contribute 35.4 ± 72.2 kg/km2 (202 ± 412 lb/sq mi), also based on 24 individuals. Bushmeat extraction in the Amazon rainforest was estimated to be much lower, at 3.69 ± 3.9 kg/km2 (21.1 ± 22.3 lb/sq mi) in the case of species weighing more than 10 kg and 0.6 ± 0.9 kg/km2 (3.4 ± 5.1 lb/sq mi) in the case of species weighing less than 10 kg, based on 3 individuals.[13][better source needed] Based on these estimates, a total of 2,200,000 t (2,200,000 long tons; 2,400,000 short tons) bushmeat is extracted in the Congo Basin per year, ranging from 12,938 t (12,734 long tons; 14,262 short tons) in Equatorial Guinea to 1,665,972 t (1,639,661 long tons; 1,836,420 short tons) in the Democratic Republic of the Congo.[14]

The 301 mammal species threatened by hunting for bushmeat comprise 126 primates, 65 even-toed ungulates, 27 bats, 26 diprotodont marsupials, 21 rodents, 12 carnivores and all pangolin species.[8]

Primate species offered fresh and smoked in 2009 at a wildlife market by Liberia's Cavally River included chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes), Diana monkey (Cercopithecus diana), putty-nosed monkey (C. nictitans), lesser spot-nosed monkey (C. petaurista), Campbell's mona monkey (C. campbelli), sooty mangabey (Cercocebus atys), king colobus (Colobus polykomos), olive colobus (Procolobus verus), western red colobus (P. badius). Duiker species constituted more than half of the total 723 animals offered.[15] In 2012, the bushmeat trade was surveyed in three villages in the Sassandra Department, Ivory Coast. During six months, nine restaurants received 376 mammals and eight reptiles, including dwarf crocodile (Osteolaemus tetraspis), harnessed bushbuck (Tragelaphus scriptus), Maxwell's duiker (Philantomba maxwellii), bay duiker (Cephalophus dorsalis), Campbell's mona monkey, lesser spot-nosed monkey, potto (Perodicticus potto), tree pangolin (Phataginus tricuspis), long-tailed pangolin (P. tetradactyla), African brush-tailed porcupine (Atherurus africanus), giant pouched rat (Cricetomys gambianus), greater cane rat (Thryonomys swinderianus), striped ground squirrel (Xerus erythropus) and western tree hyrax (Dendrohyrax dorsalis).[16] About 128,400 straw-coloured fruit bats (Eidolon helvum) were estimated in 2011 to be traded as bushmeat every year in four cities in southern Ghana.[17]

In 2006, it was estimated that about 1,437,458 animals are killed every year in the Nigerian and Cameroon parts of the Cross-Sanaga-Bioko coastal forests, including about 43,880 Emin's pouched rats (Cricetomys emini), 41,800 tree pangolins, 39,700 putty-nosed monkeys, 22,500 Mona monkeys (Cercopithecus mona), 3,500 red-eared guenons (C. erythrotis), 20,300 drills (Mandrillus leucophaeus), 15,300 African civets (Civettictis civetta), 11,900 common kusimanses (Crossarchus obscurus), more than 7,600 African palm civets (Nandinia binotata), 26,760 Nile monitors (Varanus niloticus) and 410 African forest elephants (Loxodonta cyclotis).[18]

A gorilla in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, 2008

Between 1983 and 2002, the Gabon populations of western gorilla (Gorilla gorilla) and common chimpanzee (Pan troglodytes) were estimated to have declined by 56%. This decline was primarily caused by the commercial hunting, which was facilitated by the extended infrastructure for logging purposes.[19] Marsh mongoose (Atilax paludinosus) and long-nosed mongoose (Herpestes naso) are the most numerous small carnivores offered in rural bushmeat markets in the country.[20]

In the late 1990s, fresh and smoked bonobo (Pan paniscus) carcasses were observed in Basankusu in the Province of Équateur in the Congo Basin.[21] The main species killed by bushmeat hunters in Tanzania's Katavi-Rukwa Region include impala (Aepyceros melampus), common duiker (Sylvicapra grimmia), warthog (Phacocherus africanus), Cape buffalo (Syncerus caffer), harnessed bushbuck, red river hog (Potamochoerus porcus) and plains zebra (Equus quagga).[22]

Lemurs killed in Madagascar for bushmeat

A survey in a rural area in southwestern Madagascar revealed that bushmeat hunters target bushpig (Potamochoerus larvatus), ring-tailed lemur (Lemur catta), Verreaux's sifaka (Propithecus verreauxi), Hubbard's sportive lemur (Lepilemur hubbardorum), fat-tailed dwarf lemur (Cheirogaleus medius), common tenrec (Tenrec ecaudatus), grey mouse lemur (Microcebus murinus), reddish-gray mouse lemur (M. griseorufus), Madagascan fruit bat (Eidolon dupreanum) and Madagascan flying fox (Pteropus rufus).[23]

Dynamics

[edit]
Two Malagasy bushmeat hunters with their quarry

Logging

[edit]

Logging concessions operated by companies in African forests have been closely linked to the bushmeat trade. Because they provide roads, trucks and other access to remote forests, they are the primary means for the transportation of hunters and meat between forests and urban centres. Some, including the Congolaise Industrielle du Bois (CIB) in the Republic of Congo, partnered with governments and international conservation organizations to regulate the bushmeat trade within the concessions where they operate. Numerous solutions are needed; because each country has different circumstances, traditions and laws, no one solution will work in every location.[24]

Nutrition

[edit]

Bushmeat can be an important source of micronutrients and macronutrients. A study of South Americans in the Tres Fronteras region found that those who consumed bushmeat were at a lower risk of anemia and chronic health conditions, as their diets included more iron, zinc, and vitamin C than those who did not eat bushmeat.[25]

Overfishing

[edit]

In Ghana, international illegal over-exploitation of African fishing grounds has increased demand for bushmeat. Both European Union-subsidized fleets and local commercial fleets have depleted fish stocks, leaving local people to supplement their diets with animals hunted from nature reserves. Over 30 years of data link sharp declines in both mammal populations and the biomass of 41 wildlife species with a decreased supply of fish.[26] Consumption of fish and of bushmeat is correlated: the decline of one resource drives up the demand and price for the other.[4]

Pastoralism

[edit]

Transhumant pastoralists from the border area between Sudan and the Central African Republic are accompanied by armed merchants who also engage in poaching large herbivores. The decline of giant eland, Cape buffalo, hartebeest and waterbuck in the Chinko area between 2012 and 2017 is attributed to their poaching activities. They use livestock to transport bushmeat to markets.[27]

Role in spread of diseases

[edit]
Further information: Zoonotic disease
Armillifer grandis as found in a Rhinoceros viper sold for human consumption

Animal sources may have been the cause for infectious diseases such as tuberculosis, leprosy, cholera, smallpox, measles, influenza, and syphilis acquired by early agrarians. The emergence of HIV-1, AIDS, Ebola virus disease, and Creutzfeldt-Jakob disease are attributed to animal sources today.[2] Thomas's rope squirrel (Funisciurus anerythrus) and red-legged sun squirrel (Heliosciurus rufobrachium) were found to carry MPXV in the Democratic Republic of the Congo in the 1980s.[28]

Outbreaks of the Ebola virus in the Congo Basin and in Gabon in the 1990s have been associated with the butchering and consumption of chimpanzees and bonobos.[1] Bushmeat hunters in Central Africa infected with the human T-lymphotropic virus were closely exposed to wild primates.[29] Anthrax can be transmitted when butchering and eating ungulates. The risk of bloodborne diseases to be transmitted is higher when butchering a carcass than when transporting, cooking and eating it.[30]

Many hunters and traders are not aware of zoonosis and the risks of disease transmissions.[31] An interview survey in rural communities in Nigeria revealed that 55% of the respondents knew of zoonoses, but their education and cultural traditions are important drivers for hunting and eating bushmeat despite the risks involved.[32]

HIV

[edit]

Results of research on wild chimpanzees in Cameroon indicate that they are naturally infected with the simian foamy virus and constitute a reservoir of HIV-1, a precursor of the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) in humans.[33] There are several distinct strains of HIV, indicating that this cross-species transfer has occurred several times.[34] Simian immunodeficiency virus present in chimpanzees is reportedly derived from older strains of the virus present in the collared mangabey (Cercocebus torquatus) and the putty-nosed monkey. It is likely that HIV was initially transferred to humans after having come into contact with infected bushmeat.[35]

Ebola

[edit]

The natural reservoirs of ebolaviruses are unknown.[36][37][38] Possible reservoirs include non-human primates,[36] megabats, rodents, shrews, carnivores, and ungulates.[39] Between October 2001 and December 2003, five Ebola virus outbreaks occurred in the border area between Gabon and Republic of Congo. Autopsies of wildlife carcasses showed that chimpanzees, gorillas and bay duikers were infected with the virus.[40] The Ebola virus has been linked to bushmeat, with some researchers hypothesizing that megabats are a primary host of at least some variants of Ebola virus. Between the first recorded outbreak in 1976 and the largest in 2014, the virus has transferred from animals to humans only 30 times, despite large numbers of bats being killed and sold each year. Bats drop partially eaten fruits and pulp, then terrestrial mammals such as gorillas and duikers feed on these fruits. This chain of events forms a possible indirect means of transmission from the natural host to animal populations.[41] The suspected index case for the Ebola virus epidemic in West Africa in 2014 was a two-year-old boy in Meliandou in south-eastern Guinea, who played in a hollow tree harbouring a colony of Angolan free-tailed bats (Mops condylurus).[42]

Results of a study conducted during the Ebola crisis in Liberia showed that socio-economic conditions affected bushmeat consumption. During the crisis, there was a decrease in bushmeat consumption and daily meal frequency. In addition, preferences for bushmeat species stayed the same.[43]

Parasites

[edit]

In Cameroon, 15 primate species were examined for gastrointestinal parasites. Bushmeat primates were infected with Trichuris, Entamoeba, Ascaris, Capillaria, pinworms, Bertiella and Endolimax nana.[44] A large proportion of Bitis vipers sold at rural bushmeat markets in the Democratic Republic of the Congo are infected by Armillifer grandis, which represent a threat to public health.[45]

Management

[edit]

Suggestions for reducing or halting bushmeat harvest and trade include:[46]

  • increase access of consumers to affordable and reliable alternative sources of animal protein such as chicken, small livestock and farmed fish raised at family level;
  • devolve rights and authority over wildlife to local communities;
  • strengthen the management of protected areas and enforce wildlife conservation laws.

As an alternative to bushmeat, captive breeding of species traditionally harvested from the wild is sometimes feasible. Captive breeding efforts must be closely monitored, as there is risk they can be used to launder and legitimize individuals captured from the wild, similar to the laundering of wild green tree pythons in Indonesia for the pet trade.[25]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Bushmeat

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia

Bushmeat is the meat derived from wild hunted for consumption, encompassing terrestrial mammals, birds, reptiles, and amphibians primarily harvested from the forests, savannas, and wetlands of . In rural communities of West and , bushmeat constitutes a critical source of animal protein, accounting for up to 80-90% of dietary intake in some regions where alternative or imported meats are scarce or unaffordable. Culturally embedded as a and economic commodity, its harvesting supports livelihoods for millions through local trade, yet escalating demand driven by and has intensified pressures. Unsustainable bushmeat extraction, often via snares, firearms, and opportunistic trapping, poses severe threats to , contributing to population declines and elevated risks for numerous species, including endangered like , chimpanzees, and duikers. The trade frequently involves illegal and , exacerbating the depletion of stocks and leading to "empty " syndromes where ecosystems persist but large vertebrates vanish. Moreover, contact with infected bushmeat during hunting, butchering, and consumption has facilitated zoonotic spillovers, implicated in the origins and amplification of pathogens such as HIV-1 and HIV-2 from viruses, virus outbreaks, and monkeypox epidemics. These health risks underscore bushmeat's dual role as a nutritional staple amid and a vector for infectious disease emergence, prompting international conservation efforts to curb while addressing underlying socioeconomic drivers.

Definition and Nomenclature

Terminology and Definitions

Bushmeat refers to meat derived from non-domesticated , including mammals, birds, reptiles, and amphibians, that are hunted primarily for human consumption through subsistence or commercial trade. This term encompasses harvesting from forested, savannah, or environments, distinct from domesticated production. While originating in West and Central African contexts, the concept and analogous practices extend to parts of and , where meat serves similar dietary roles. The word "bushmeat" derives from the English compound "" + "," with "" denoting rural or uncultivated areas, serving as a of the French phrase viande de brousse ("brush meat"), which similarly evokes meat from untamed brushlands. Early documented usage appears in 19th-century accounts of African , such as an 1843 reference to natives pursuing wild animals termed "bushmeat" after igniting grasslands. Equivalent terms in French-speaking African regions include viande de brousse, while broader English synonyms like " meat" or "" are sometimes used, though "bushmeat" specifically highlights non-commercial or informal wild sourcing in tropical contexts. Bushmeat hunting differs from , which typically involves illegal targeting of protected for trophies, hides, or high-value rather than routine food ; bushmeat emphasizes protein extraction for local diets, though it may overlap with illegality when quotas or protections are violated. It also contrasts with sustainable harvesting, which implies regulated, low-impact extraction to maintain populations, whereas bushmeat practices often prioritize immediate needs over long-term viability, leading to in high-demand areas. Empirically, bushmeat constitutes a primary protein source in rural , providing up to 80-90% of animal protein intake in certain communities according to studies spanning 2000-2014.

Regional and Cultural Variations

In , bushmeat commonly encompasses antelopes such as duikers (Cephalophus spp.), including monkeys, and like the (Thryonomys swinderianus) and African giant rat (Cricetomys gambianus), which are harvested using snares, guns, and traps in forested areas. In , practices extend to larger game like and for select communities, though smaller mammals predominate in daily consumption due to accessibility. East African variations feature porcupines (Hystrix spp.) and smaller ungulates, integrated into local diets through community hunts that reflect seasonal availability and kinship-based sharing norms. Across , particularly in Southeast regions like the and , bushmeat includes fruit bats (Pteropodidae family), civets (), and wild pigs, often sourced from secondary forests and consumed in rural households as a customary protein alternative amid limited options. In , Amazonian practices target such as spider monkeys (Ateles spp.) and woolly monkeys (Lagothrix spp.), alongside rodents like pacas (Cuniculus paca), where sustains indigenous groups through bow-and-arrow methods tied to territorial resource management. These regional practices underscore bushmeat's role as a normalized , providing essential protein in protein-scarce environments without inherent or in originating cultures; for instance, in African communities, it features in rituals like Gabonese circumcision ceremonies. Annual harvest in Africa's reaches approximately 4.5 million metric tons, supporting dietary staples for millions in rural areas. Legal categorizations differ by nation, with some species like blue duikers (Cephalophus monticola) regulated under Appendix II for controls, while many local ungulates and remain unregulated for subsistence use, prioritizing community-level access over uniform prohibitions.

Historical Development

Pre-Colonial and Traditional Hunting

Archaeological evidence from Central and West African sites reveals that wild meat consumption formed a core component of indigenous diets for millennia, particularly among societies in forested regions where was constrained by dense vegetation and poor soils. Faunal remains, including bones of duikers, , and primates, from contexts in areas like the indicate selective of available game as a primary protein source, with practices traceable to at least 10,000 years ago based on associated tool assemblages and isotopic analysis of human remains showing high reliance on terrestrial animal proteins. Traditional hunting methods among groups such as the Central African Pygmies (e.g., Mbuti, Aka, and Baka) emphasized low-impact techniques adapted to forest ecology, including communal net hunts where groups encircled prey drives, bows with poison-tipped arrows, spears for close-range kills, and vine traps or snares set along animal trails. These methods were seasonally attuned, targeting migrations of species like forest antelopes and monkeys during dry periods when visibility improved, and were often communal events reinforcing social bonds. In Pygmy societies, hunting integrated cultural rituals, such as invocations to forest spirits before expeditions and post-hunt divisions of meat according to status and contribution, embedding the practice within oral traditions of ecological knowledge passed through generations. Pre-20th century sustainability stemmed from sparse population densities—typically under 0.1 individuals per square kilometer in remote zones—and self-regulating like rotational grounds and taboos on certain or breeding seasons, which prevented localized depletion as evidenced by stable populations in ethnographic accounts of uncontacted groups. Oral histories collected from elders in studies through the describe these practices as balanced, with hunters relocating camps to allow game recovery, contrasting sharply with later escalations from external pressures.

Colonial Influences and Modern Expansion

During the late 19th and early 20th centuries, colonial administrations in , such as the (1885–1960), implemented policies emphasizing resource extraction and production, including rubber, , and minerals, which displaced indigenous communities from traditional and farming lands. These impositions, enforced through forced labor systems and land concessions to European companies, curtailed access to domestic and alternative proteins, heightening reliance on as a dietary staple amid shortages. In the specifically, colonial wildlife regulations paradoxically restricted local while prioritizing exports of and trophies, yet failed to provide viable substitutes, embedding bushmeat deeper into subsistence economies as populations adapted to disrupted agrarian systems. Post-independence from the onward, accelerated urbanization across Central and —driven by rural-to-urban migration amid economic stagnation and population growth—propelled bushmeat from localized subsistence to organized commercial networks supplying burgeoning cities. For example, in , Yaoundé's population surged from approximately 100,000 in 1960 to over 1 million by the 1990s, fostering urban markets where bushmeat volumes escalated due to inadequate supply chains and levels exceeding 50% in rural hinterlands. Similarly, in the Democratic Republic of Congo, Kinshasa's expansion from 300,000 residents in 1960 to around 17 million by 2020 amplified demand, with roads and informal transport enabling hunters to deliver meat from forests to city vendors, marking a shift where commercial trade volumes overtook traditional use by the late . By the 2000–2020 period, demographic pressures in , including annual population growth rates of 2.5–3.5% in countries like the DRC and Republic of Congo, correlated with bushmeat harvest estimates of 1–5 million metric tons annually across the , reflecting intensified extraction to meet urban consumption needs. This expansion, valued at hundreds of millions of dollars yearly for hunters and intermediaries, stemmed from causal factors like limited for alternatives and per capita income gaps, with studies noting harvests equivalent to 4–5 million tons in broader sub-Saharan contexts tied to forest-adjacent population densities exceeding sustainable yields.

Cultural, Economic, and Nutritional Significance

Traditional Uses and Food Security

In rural areas of West and , where domestic is often scarce due to environmental constraints and limited , bushmeat constitutes the primary source of animal protein for many households, accounting for 80-90% of such intake in certain regions. Empirical surveys indicate that reliance on bushmeat enhances household , with studies in the Congo Basin's Rainforest Biotic Zone demonstrating that greater availability of wild meat correlates with reduced rates of child stunting (by up to 10 percentage points) and among dependent populations. This role is particularly pronounced in food-insecure communities, where bushmeat hunting provides a direct buffer against seasonal or climatic disruptions, such as crop failures from droughts or pests, enabling vulnerable families to maintain caloric and protein sufficiency when agricultural yields falter. Culturally, bushmeat is embedded in daily diets and ceremonial practices across , often preferred for its perceived superior flavor and freshness compared to imported or factory-farmed alternatives like or . In surveys of hunters and consumers in the Democratic Republic of Congo, 75% reported using bushmeat for cultural events, including festivals, holidays, and rites of passage, where it symbolizes abundance and tradition. This integration underscores its function beyond mere subsistence, fostering social cohesion in rural settings while addressing immediate food needs in areas with unreliable access to commercial proteins. Field research in biodiversity hotspots, such as those in Cross River, Nigeria, further links bushmeat consumption to elevated metrics, with households engaging in exhibiting higher dietary diversity and resilience to shocks compared to non-hunting peers. These findings, drawn from longitudinal household data, highlight bushmeat's causal role in mitigating undernutrition risks, particularly for children and low-income groups, without reliance on external aid or market interventions.

Economic Role in Livelihoods and Trade

Bushmeat trade sustains livelihoods for millions across sub-Saharan Africa, generating an estimated hundreds of millions of U.S. dollars annually in informal revenue while supporting hunters, traders, and processors amid limited formal employment opportunities. In regions like West and Central Africa, it functions as a parallel economy, with market values ranging from US$42 million to US$205 million continent-wide, often comparable to local fisheries in volume and economic output for rural communities. For instance, in Nigeria's Ibadan markets, bushmeat sales provide primary income for vendors and hunters, with studies documenting substantial daily earnings from wildlife sales that cover household needs in the absence of viable alternatives. Rural households in and derive 20-50% of their protein from bushmeat, but its economic role extends to cash income, where wild meat sales can comprise a major portion of earnings for impoverished families lacking access to or wage labor. In , the sector contributes about 0.17% to non-oil GDP, equivalent to , with individual hunters averaging €70 annually from sales, underscoring its role in alleviation despite regulatory pressures. Urban demand amplifies this trade, as growing city populations in seek bushmeat as a preferred protein, fueling supply chains that extend to international networks delivering thousands of tonnes yearly to and via . This export dimension adds value but stems from local economic desperation, where prohibitions risk deepening traps by eliminating a key income source without substituting alternatives like sustainable farming or protein imports. The opportunity costs of outright bans are evident in socioeconomic surveys, as bushmeat harvesting fills gaps in and revenue for the rural poor, who face high and faunal depletion that limits scalability yet sustains basic needs. In logging-dependent areas of the , for example, bushmeat supplies income for 99% of hunting households in towns, rivaling other extractive activities and highlighting the causal link between resource access and livelihood stability. Without addressing root drivers like and market failures, enforcement alone exacerbates vulnerability, as evidenced by persistent trade volumes despite crackdowns.

Nutritional Profile and Health Benefits

Bushmeat serves as a nutrient-dense source of animal protein, often exceeding domesticated meats in of key micronutrients due to the wild animals' diverse diets and active lifestyles. such as duikers, like grasscutters, and typically contain 20-25% protein by wet weight, with profiles supporting muscle repair and growth. Fats in bushmeat are predominantly unsaturated, providing energy without the marbling seen in factory-farmed , while minerals like iron (up to 3-5 mg/100g in some game) and exhibit forms that enhance absorption rates over plant-based alternatives. levels, critical for neurological function, frequently surpass those in (around 0.3-0.5 μg/100g versus 1-2 μg/100g in wild ungulates), addressing deficiencies prevalent in rural diets lacking or fortified foods. In comparison to common domestic proteins like or , bushmeat offers advantages in remote, infrastructure-poor regions where cold-chain limit access to perishables. A 100g serving of bushmeat can deliver 70-80% of daily protein needs for adults, outpacing 's 20-25g per equivalent portion when accounting for sporadic availability of in forested areas. provides omega-3s but often requires processing that bushmeat hunting circumvents through immediate consumption, preserving and content otherwise degraded in transport. These attributes position bushmeat as a resilient option, contributing up to 72% of household protein intake in surveyed Central African communities without reliable markets for alternatives. Empirical studies link bushmeat consumption to improved child growth metrics, particularly in combating stunting and . In the Central African Biotic Zone, households with greater wild meat availability exhibited stunting rates below 40%, compared to over 50% in zones with limited access, attributing benefits to bioavailable iron and B12 reducing chronic undernutrition. Similarly, among vulnerable rural children, regular intake correlates with elevated levels, mitigating iron-deficiency risks that affect . These outcomes underscore bushmeat's role in filling gaps where crop monocultures dominate, though benefits accrue primarily from sustainable, moderate consumption patterns observed in traditional .

Hunting Practices and Drivers

Methods and Technologies

Bushmeat employs a range of techniques that have evolved from low-technology subsistence practices to more efficient, industrialized approaches, reflecting changes in and market demands. Traditional methods, predominant in rural communities for millennia, include the use of traps, snares, bows and arrows, spears, machetes, and dogs to capture small to medium-sized mammals in forested areas. These techniques prioritize stealth and minimal equipment, allowing individual or small family groups to harvest for local consumption without extensive . A significant shift occurred in the late , particularly post-1980s, as improved forest access via logging roads facilitated the proliferation of firearms among , transitioning from artisanal to semi-industrial operations. Wire snares, often made from imported materials like vehicle cables, emerged as a low-cost, high-volume alternative to guns, enabling passive capture of multiple animals and reducing the need for direct confrontation. Firearms, including rifles and shotguns, dominate commercial hunting, allowing for rapid kills over greater distances and supporting organized groups that harvest larger quantities per outing. Hunting operates on varying scales: subsistence efforts by smallholder households yield limited harvests for household protein needs, while commercial operations involve coordinated gangs equipped with guns and dogs, capable of killing up to 15 animals in a single night to supply urban markets. Globally, these practices affect over 300 terrestrial , with pressure intensifying through technological adaptations that boost harvest efficiency. Technological advancements in transport, such as the widespread adoption of motorcycles since the early , have further scaled operations by enabling faster movement of hunters into remote areas and bulk delivery of —up to 185 kg per trip in some regions—outpacing traditional carriers like bicycles or donkeys. This mobility, often on dirt tracks created by , links rural harvest sites to urban networks, amplifying overall extraction rates without proportional increases in labor.

Socioeconomic and Environmental Drivers

remains a primary socioeconomic driver of bushmeat across , where limited access to affordable protein alternatives compels rural households to rely on wild game for subsistence. In regions with high rates, such as parts of Central and , bushmeat provides a low-cost source of amid stagnant wages and inadequate agricultural yields, with studies indicating that poorer communities harvest up to 80-90% of their animal protein from in remote areas. This dependence intensifies with systemic factors like and food insecurity, where bushmeat fills gaps left by insufficient domestic meat production. Population growth exacerbates demand pressures, with Africa's annual rate averaging approximately 2.5% from 2020 to 2025 according to projections, straining local resources and amplifying hunting intensity in expanding peri-urban fringes. In and ecosystems, this demographic surge correlates with elevated bushmeat extraction, as growing family sizes and urban migration increase both subsistence needs and commercial trade volumes, particularly in countries like the of Congo and . Empirical data from household surveys reveal that settlements nearer urban centers, facing higher populations, exhibit greater per capita bushmeat consumption due to these scarcity-induced incentives. Environmental changes facilitate hunting access, notably through logging infrastructure in the Congo Basin, where road networks expanded by 87,000 kilometers since 2003, penetrating previously inaccessible forests and enabling hunters to transport larger hauls to markets. These corridors, often built for timber extraction, inadvertently boost bushmeat offtake by providing loggers and migrant workers with on-site protein needs, leading to localized wildlife depletions near roadways. Similarly, overfishing in West African coastal waters, driven by industrial trawling in the Gulf of Guinea, has diminished fish supplies by up to 50% in local markets since the early 2000s, prompting protein shifts toward terrestrial bushmeat as fish prices rise and availability falls. Scarcity of viable alternatives further entrenches bushmeat reliance, as livestock rearing faces barriers from high feed costs, disease outbreaks like African swine fever, and infrastructural deficits in veterinary services, rendering domesticated proteins uneconomically competitive in rural settings. Economic analyses, including a 2013 study in , demonstrate that bushmeat demand exhibits low own-price elasticity—meaning consumption persists despite moderate price hikes—while cross-price elasticities with substitutes like or are positive but constrained by the latters' higher relative costs and lower availability in remote areas. In Tanzania's periphery, for instance, households prioritize bushmeat when livestock prices exceed local tolerances, underscoring incentive structures where wild harvest yields higher net returns under resource constraints.

Affected Wildlife and Ecological Impacts

Primary Species Targeted

Mammals dominate bushmeat harvests across , with and accounting for the highest proportions of extracted biomass based on market and surveys. Duikers (Cephalophus spp.), small antelopes, represent a primary target due to their prevalence in wooded habitats, while larger antelopes feature more prominently in regions. , including chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes) and various species, are hunted extensively in tropical s, comprising up to 15-30% of trade in surveyed areas. such as cane rats (Thryonomys spp.) and giant pouched rats (Cricetomys spp.) form another key group, valued for their size and accessibility via snares or traps. Bats (Chiroptera) and birds serve as secondary , particularly in forested zones where fruit bats supplement mammalian catches, though they contribute less to overall volume. Reptiles, including monitors and pythons, appear sporadically in harvests but remain marginal compared to mammals. Regional market data from indicate often constitute the majority of offerings, with like grasscutters (Thryonomys swinderianus) dominating urban trade as per 2020s surveys. Empirical estimates from studies, hunter interviews, and market weigh-ins during the 2010s-2020s place annual bushmeat extraction at 4.5-4.9 million tonnes across the region, involving over 500 species predominantly mammals. In the , ungulates alone yield around 80% of in some locales, underscoring their central role in supply chains. These figures derive from aggregated data across forests and savannas, highlighting and ungulates' outsized contribution despite ' visibility in trade.

Biodiversity Effects and Population Data

Bushmeat has led to local depletions and declines among targeted , particularly larger-bodied and ungulates, contributing to reduced in hunted forests. A 2016 global analysis identified 301 terrestrial threatened primarily by for bushmeat, including 136 , 60 even-toed ungulates, and 33 carnivores, with many classified as vulnerable or endangered by the IUCN due to this pressure. These declines are most pronounced in regions with high intensity, such as Central African forests, where overharvesting exceeds replacement rates for slow-reproducing . Empirical data from specific sites illustrate varying degrees of impact; for instance, populations in Cameroon's Dja Faunal Reserve experienced a 70% decline between 2015 and 2022, attributed largely to bushmeat alongside other threats. Across tropical regions, has caused defaunation rates of up to 83% for mammals in heavily exploited areas, though global remain rare without concurrent . Approximately 60% of worldwide are now threatened with , with 75% of populations declining, driven in part by bushmeat demand but amplified by habitat loss as a primary cofactor. Population resilience is evident in areas of low density and limited pressure, where some maintain stable numbers through natural recovery or shifts to more abundant prey. Studies indicate that subsistence at levels below 50% of can be sustainable for certain and smaller mammals, allowing biomass regeneration. However, for larger like apes, even moderate disrupts community structure, leading to cascading effects on forest ecosystems, though alone rarely causes outright absent synergistic pressures like . This underscores as a significant but not isolated driver of effects.

Health Risks and Zoonotic Transmission

Disease Vectors and Empirical Evidence

Bushmeat handling, particularly during butchering and processing, serves as a primary vector for zoonotic transmission through direct contact with infected animal blood, bodily fluids, and tissues, which can enter humans via skin abrasions, mucous membranes, or inhalation of aerosols. Empirical studies from outbreak investigations and serological surveys in Central and West Africa demonstrate that such exposures facilitate spillover events, with laboratory confirmation of pathogen viability in fresh carcasses. For instance, systematic mapping of literature from 1996 to 2022 identified handling practices as a key risk factor across multiple pathogen types, including viruses and bacteria shed during evisceration and skinning. Despite high volumes of bushmeat consumption—estimated at millions of tons annually in tropical forests— incidence of zoonotic infections remains low, as evidenced by seroprevalence data showing frequent exposure without widespread disease manifestation. Reviews indicate that while hunters exhibit elevated antibody rates for certain retroviruses (e.g., simian foamy viruses detected in up to regular infection levels among hunters), human-to-human transmission is absent, and clinical cases are sporadic relative to exposure frequency. This discrepancy underscores that transmission requires confluence of factors like in the animal, host susceptibility, and inadequate barriers, rather than inevitable outcomes from routine handling. Preparation methods significantly modulate risks, with thorough cooking (e.g., or to internal temperatures exceeding 70°C) inactivating enveloped viruses, , and many parasites present in undercooked , thereby shifting primary transmission burdens to pre-cooking handling stages. Field and lab from assessments reveal high microbial loads on tools and surfaces, but post-cooking analyses show reduced viability, supporting observations that consumption of properly prepared bushmeat poses lower empirical than raw handling. Protective measures like gloves during butchering further attenuate contact hazards, as quantified in models from European import scenarios where viable survival diminishes rapidly with and time.

Specific Pathogens: HIV, Ebola, and Others

The zoonotic transmission of human immunodeficiency virus type 1 (HIV-1) group M, the primary cause of the global AIDS pandemic, originated from simian immunodeficiency virus (SIVcpz) in central chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes troglodytes) in southeastern Cameroon around the early 20th century, specifically circa the 1920s. Genetic phylogenetic analyses of viral sequences from wild chimpanzees and early human samples confirm this single cross-species jump, likely occurring during bushmeat hunting and carcass processing that exposed humans to chimpanzee blood and tissues containing the virus. While bushmeat handling provided the initial vector, the virus's establishment and spread in humans relied on subsequent human-to-human transmission through sexual contact, blood exposure, and other non-zoonotic routes, with no evidence of ongoing frequent spillovers from primates. Ebolavirus outbreaks have been documented to initiate via handling of infected great apes or fruit bats during bushmeat activities, with fruit bats (Pteropodidae family) serving as the natural reservoir and apes as amplifying hosts. For instance, the 2014 West Africa Ebola outbreak, which caused over 28,000 cases, traced its index case to bushmeat consumption involving bats or primates in Guinea. Seroprevalence surveys in equatorial African populations, including bushmeat hunters, reveal virus antibodies in 1-4% of individuals, suggesting past asymptomatic exposures but underscoring the rarity of clinical outbreaks relative to the millions annually engaging in bushmeat and consumption across Central and . Spillover events remain sporadic, with documented links to direct contact with infected animal carcasses rather than routine dietary intake. Other pathogens associated with bushmeat include parasitic nematodes like Trichinella species, which cause trichinellosis upon ingestion of undercooked meat from infected such as bushpigs and carnivores in . Cases arise from larvae encysted in muscle tissue, with reports of human infections linked to consumption of raw or inadequately cooked bushmeat in regions like East and , where T. nelsoni predominates in reservoirs. Emerging risks involve tick-borne zoonoses, as highlighted in a 2025 study identifying pathogens transmissible via ticks infesting bushmeat during handling and preparation, exacerbating threats amid rising volumes. Overall, empirical data indicate infection rates from these pathogens remain below 1% in surveyed hunter cohorts for acute zoonoses, reflecting effective immune responses or preparation methods mitigating widespread transmission despite high exposure volumes.

Mitigation Through Preparation and Hygiene

Thorough cooking of bushmeat to internal temperatures of at least 70°C inactivates enveloped viruses such as virus, rendering the meat safe for consumption according to assessments. The virus, like other lipid-enveloped pathogens, denatures at 60°C for 30 minutes throughout the food mass, as established by thermal inactivation studies referenced in international guidelines. Similarly, , another zoonotic concern linked to , is destroyed by standard cooking processes exceeding 60°C, preventing transmission through properly prepared . Hygiene measures during handling and significantly curb direct exposure to infectious fluids. Wearing gloves and maintaining separation between raw bushmeat and food surfaces reduce contact with blood or tissues harboring pathogens, as evidenced by zoonotic risk assessments in handling. Handwashing with after butchering lowers bacterial and viral contamination risks, with studies in animal-contact settings showing improved compliance correlates with fewer transmission incidents. Traditional preservation methods, such as smoking and salting, further mitigate risks by reducing water activity and inhibiting microbial proliferation. In Central and West African contexts, bushmeat is commonly smoked or salted post-harvest, which dehydrates tissues and introduces antimicrobial compounds, empirically supporting pathogen reduction without modern equipment. Comparable practices in Amazonian wild meat trade demonstrate decreased foodborne disease incidence through these techniques. Epidemiological patterns indicate that, despite widespread bushmeat consumption in endemic regions, routine zoonotic transmission to consumers via prepared meat remains low, attributable to these preparation norms. No confirmed cases have arisen from cooked bushmeat in documented outbreaks, with infections primarily traced to raw handling rather than . This suggests effective mitigation in cultural contexts, though gaps in awareness persist among handlers.

Conservation Efforts and Policy Responses

Regulatory Frameworks and Enforcement

National laws in countries, including the of Congo (DRC), , and , prohibit the commercial and trade of protected species, with restrictions intensifying in the through codes and acts that ban extraction from protected areas and urban . In the DRC, for example, apes has been illegal since the , classifying such bushmeat activities as part of illicit when involving endangered taxa. These frameworks target unsustainable practices but often exempt subsistence , leading to ambiguities in application across vast rural landscapes. Internationally, the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora () regulates trade in numerous bushmeat species, appending primates like chimpanzees (Pan troglodytes, Appendix I since 1975) and antelopes such as the (Taurotragus derbianus, Appendix I) to prevent export-driven depletion. Compliance requires national permitting systems, though much bushmeat trade remains domestic and unregulated under , focusing enforcement on cross-border shipments of listed species. Enforcement is hampered by systemic corruption, inadequate resources, and expansive territories exceeding patrol capacities, with forested areas in spanning over 200 million hectares. data highlight corruption's role, implicating police in 32% and administrative officials in wildlife crime cases, eroding judicial outcomes. The 2024 World Wildlife Crime Report notes persistently low detection and prosecution rates due to these factors, undermining statutory bans despite periodic seizures at checkpoints. In , Namibia's communal conservancy system, established under the 1996 Nature Conservation Amendment Act, devolves to communities via annual quotas derived from aerial surveys and ground counts, permitting regulated offtake for meat distribution to residents. This approach has yielded mixed results, stabilizing some populations while illegal bushmeat persists in peripheral zones, as quotas prioritize revenues over subsistence meat needs.

Sustainable Alternatives and Community-Based Approaches

Domesticated farming of species like the (Thryonomys swinderianus), known as grasscutter in , has emerged as a protein substitute to reduce reliance on wild bushmeat. In , grasscutter farming supplies a notable portion of game meat consumed, with production systems focusing on to meet local demand while minimizing pressure on wild populations. Efforts to scale ranches have intensified since the , supported by research on feeding, housing, and reproductive performance, though challenges persist in disease management and market integration. Similar initiatives in highlight cane rats' viability for sustainable production, leveraging their rapid and adaptability to . Community-based approaches include managed zones where local groups regulate quotas and share benefits, as seen in Namibia's conservancies, which have reduced illegal bushmeat extraction through participatory . Incentives such as conditional cash transfers tied to conservation compliance aim to shift behaviors, with some 2021 analyses suggesting potential for subsidizing reduced via ecosystem service payments, though empirical success varies by community cohesion. Outcomes remain mixed, as alternative protein programs like often fail without robust infrastructure, facing high attrition from disease outbreaks, feed costs, and limited market access; evaluations in indicate low overall effectiveness in curbing bushmeat hunting. For domesticated game to succeed, integration with training, veterinary support, and value chains is essential, as standalone efforts frequently underperform due to unmet human nutritional and economic needs.

Controversies and Alternative Perspectives

Debates on Overstated Risks vs. Human Necessity

Critics of stringent bushmeat regulations argue that zoonotic risks, while empirically documented through sporadic spillover events, are overstated in public discourse relative to the scale of consumption, as major epidemic-scale transmissions remain infrequent despite sustained high-volume harvesting. Annual bushmeat harvests in Central and are estimated at 1 to 5 million metric tons, supporting protein needs for millions in rural communities over decades, yet documented zoonotic outbreaks traceable to bushmeat have not scaled proportionally to this exposure. This perspective emphasizes causal factors like handling practices over inherent species risks, suggesting that alarmist narratives amplify rare events without accounting for baseline epidemiological baselines in high-contact subsistence economies. In contrast, bushmeat serves as a critical necessity for in impoverished rural areas, where it constitutes 80-90% of animal protein intake in regions lacking affordable domestic alternatives. Studies indicate that wild meat harvesting provides both nutritional benefits and supplemental income, particularly for low-wealth households in biodiversity hotspots like the , where livestock ownership is limited and market access poor. Removal of this resource without viable substitutes risks exacerbating and economic marginalization, as evidenced by correlations between bushmeat reliance and household metrics in communal tenure zones. Local communities often view bushmeat as a culturally embedded safety net, prioritizing immediate survival over distant ecological or health hypotheticals. Debates highlight tensions between international conservation advocacy, which frames bushmeat as a primary vector, and data-driven assessments underscoring human prioritization in the Global South. Research critiques bans for ignoring nonmonetary dimensions of bushmeat use, such as cultural practices and fallback nutrition during agricultural shortfalls, potentially driving clandestine trade that undermines enforcement. A 2021 analysis warned that abrupt wild meat exclusion from diets could induce land-use intensification for protein replacement, compounding without addressing root drivers. Proponents of moderated approaches advocate empirical baselines—favoring community-managed quotas over prohibitions—to balance verified risks against verifiable benefits, noting that unsubstantiated global assumptions often overlook local adaptive capacities.

Critiques of Conservation Narratives and Bans

Critiques of bushmeat conservation narratives contend that they often emphasize catastrophic risks while overlooking of population resilience in areas with regulated access and ignoring the role of local in incentivizing sustainable practices. For instance, prohibitions frequently fail to incorporate community-based models, which could align human incentives with through controlled harvests rather than blanket restrictions that undermine traditional systems. Such narratives, proponents argue, stem from top-down perspectives that undervalue data on harvest rates sustainable for certain , potentially exaggerating threats to justify interventions disconnected from on-ground dynamics. Empirical assessments of bushmeat bans reveal frequent unintended consequences, including surges in clandestine trade that evade oversight and exacerbate enforcement challenges. In , following the 2014 Ebola outbreak-induced prohibition, bushmeat markets rapidly reemerged by mid-2015, with vendors openly selling prohibited species like monkeys and despite legal risks, as demand persisted amid limited alternatives. Similar patterns emerge elsewhere, where bans on necessity-driven trade for protein in rural areas drive underground economies, reducing traceability and potentially increasing pressures on while imposing economic hardships on dependent communities without curbing consumption. Advocates for sustainable use frameworks propose market-oriented approaches over outright prohibitions, citing evidence that regulated trade can support by integrating local livelihoods with conservation. A 2024 study in Nigeria's markets highlights how formalizing bushmeat supply chains could enhance equity, reduce illegal hunting, and fund monitoring through revenue, drawing on vendor dynamics to inform viable quotas rather than punitive measures. Complementary analyses underscore that well-enforced legal trade, backed by data on population viability, outperforms bans by mitigating incentives and fostering community investment in habitat protection, as seen in models balancing harvest with regeneration rates. These perspectives emphasize causal links between design and outcomes, arguing that ignoring economic realities perpetuates cycles of non-compliance and resource depletion.

References

  1. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/animals/article/bushmeat-explained
  2. https://forestsnews.cifor.org/23954/10-things-you-didnt-know-about-bushmeat-in-africa?fnl=en
  3. https://www.ifaw.org/journal/what-is-bushmeat
  4. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7126303/
  5. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7123567/
  6. https://www.africamuseum.be/en/research/news/bushmeat
  7. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5098989/
  8. https://popcenter.asu.edu/sites/g/files/litvpz3631/files/illegal_bushmeat_hunting_2021.pdf
  9. https://www.fws.gov/testimony/illegal-bushmeat-consumption-africa
  10. https://www.cifor-icraf.org/publications/pdf_files/media/cbd-ts-33-en.pdf
  11. https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/23/12/17-0563_article
  12. https://wwwnc.cdc.gov/eid/article/28/4/21-0249_article
  13. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3367616/
  14. https://earth.org/bushmeat-africa-wildlife/
  15. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/agricultural-and-biological-sciences/bushmeat
  16. https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/bushmeat
  17. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7122066/
  18. https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rsos.160498
  19. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3323830/
  20. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006320714004182
  21. https://cites.unia.es/cites/file.php/1/files/bushmeat-FSVO.pdf
  22. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/194008291200500203
  23. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2351989421001815
  24. https://foris.fao.org/wfc2015/api/file/55560e24f842363144d618c6/contents/c3d97795-0298-4e6e-8e0f-a3ab183be83b.pdf
  25. https://news.mongabay.com/2017/03/endangered-species-to-declare-europes-understudied-bushmeat-trade/
  26. https://cites.org/sites/default/files/eng/cop/11/doc/44.pdf
  27. https://oxfordre.com/africanhistory/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780190277734.001.0001/acrefore-9780190277734-e-405
  28. http://in-africa.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Kusimba-2005-JAR-what-is-a-hunter-gatherer.pdf
  29. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5010184/
  30. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006320798000135
  31. https://cifor-icraf.org/publications/pdf_files/media/cbd-ts-33-en.pdf
  32. https://voxdev.org/lasting-effects-colonial-era-resource-exploitation-congo
  33. https://www.africamuseum.be/en/research/discover/news/faune_sauvage_et_colonisation
  34. https://tri.yale.edu/tropical-resources/tropical-resources-vol-34/devouring-congo
  35. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?referer=&httpsredir=1&article=1155&context=masters_theses
  36. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0305750X22002509
  37. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1748-9326/ab36fa
  38. https://documents1.worldbank.org/curated/en/099101925105573830/pdf/P180767-7407229e-721f-443e-8e01-20010e7fe34a.pdf
  39. https://www.cifor-icraf.org/publications/pdf_files/media/Bushmeat_FactSheet.pdf
  40. https://earth.org/data_visualization/mapping-the-african-bushmeat-crisis/
  41. https://www.nature.com/articles/srep08168
  42. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/256102940_The_Importance_of_Bushmeat_in_the_Livelihoods_of_West_African_Cash-Crop_Farmers_Living_in_a_Faunally-Depleted_Landscape
  43. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4441483/
  44. https://goldberglab.wisc.edu/pdf/P189.pdf
  45. https://www.patrolling.org/poaching-threats/bushmeat-meat-trade/
  46. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/19400829241268454
  47. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/conservation-science/articles/10.3389/fcosc.2024.1401308/full
  48. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/353318604_ECONOMIC_CONTRIBUTION_OF_WILDLIFE_TO_BUSHMEAT_MARKETS_IN_IBADAN_OYO_STATE
  49. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3161600/
  50. https://agritrop.cirad.fr/580183/1/IFR%2520Lescuyer%2520and%2520Nasi.pdf
  51. https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2024/feb/01/suitcase-smugglers-feeding-europe-bushmeat-wildlife-endangered
  52. https://www.ecojust.eu/bushmeat-trafficking-in-europe-a-ticking-time-bomb/
  53. https://wwfint.awsassets.panda.org/downloads/bushmeatalternatives.pdf
  54. https://www.awf.org/news/conservation-friendly-livelihoods-limit-illegal-bushmeat-trade
  55. https://openknowledge.fao.org/server/api/core/bitstreams/bed64289-e667-41cf-b8a6-9bcbbb6ed3fb/content
  56. https://www.internationalscholarsjournals.com/articles/supplies-of-bushmeat-for-livelihoods-in-logging-towns-in-the-congo-basin.pdf
  57. https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/csp2.70090
  58. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/378770133_CONCENTRATION_OF_NUTRIENTS_PRESENT_IN_FRESH_AND_ROASTED_BUSH_MEAT_GRASS_CUTTER_THRYONOMYS_SWIDERIANUS
  59. https://besjournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1002/pan3.10759
  60. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0002916523327539
  61. https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Comparison-of-nutrient-intake-from-bushmeat-per-meal-per-day-in-relation-to-nutritional_tbl4_283052328
  62. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4313087/
  63. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-022-09260-3
  64. http://foris.fao.org/wfc2015/api/file/552e5deb9e00c2f116f8e973/contents/e610fbd8-7c7e-4594-a42a-879e778e34fc.pdf
  65. https://academic.oup.com/book/49396/chapter/416643358
  66. https://www.un.org/en/chronicle/article/illegal-commercial-bushmeat-trade-central-and-west-africa
  67. https://earth.org/data_visualization/bushmeat-hunting-in-south-america/
  68. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/272011261_The_role_of_bushmeat_in_a_West_African_agricultural_landscape
  69. https://biglife.org/the-escalating-crisis/bush-meat-a-commercial-industry
  70. https://www.[researchgate](/page/ResearchGate).net/publication/352999780_The_Efficiency_of_Motorcycle_Use_in_Illegal_Bushmeat_Transportation_in_Western_Serengeti_Tanzania
  71. https://www.traffic.org/site/assets/files/14550/int386-retta-bushmeat_market_survey_eaf_report-20210225-vfinal.pdf
  72. https://www.[patrolling](/page/Patrolling).org/getting-poached-bushmeat-to-the-market/
  73. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006320717321985
  74. https://population.un.org/wpp/
  75. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006320717321766
  76. https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.1011526108
  77. https://news.mongabay.com/2019/06/logging-road-construction-surged-in-the-congo-basin-since-2003/
  78. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/35701921/
  79. https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2004/11/041129105750.htm
  80. https://newsarchive.berkeley.edu/news/media/releases/2004/11/11_bmeat.shtml
  81. https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/csp2.419
  82. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0921800913001122
  83. https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/ecolec/v91y2013icp1-9.html
  84. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227556631_Impacts_of_hunting_on_mammals_in_African_tropical_moist_forests_A_review_and_synthesis
  85. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/9781118409572.ch5
  86. https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/csp2.599
  87. https://journals.plos.org/plosntds/article?id=10.1371/journal.pntd.0003792
  88. http://www.primate-sg.org/storage/pdf/PC36_Amin_et_al_great_apes_Dja_Cameroon.pdf
  89. https://africanconservation.org/wildlife-news/hunting-responsible-for-sharp-decline-in-tropical-wildlife-and-birds-with-83-and-58/
  90. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5242557/
  91. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/ecology-and-evolution/articles/10.3389/fevo.2019.00357/full
  92. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10665173/
  93. https://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/press/news/141104a
  94. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12309406/
  95. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3234451/
  96. https://www.ucsf.edu/news/2009/12/103305/chimp-subspecies-identified-suspected-source-human-hiv-virus
  97. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC2935100/
  98. https://www.bbc.com/news/health-29604204
  99. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6478206/
  100. https://www.nature.com/articles/sdata2016133
  101. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23041114/
  102. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2213224424000300
  103. https://www.cfs.gov.hk/english/multimedia/multimedia_pub/multimedia_pub_fsf_98_01.html
  104. https://www.who.int/news/item/24-08-2014-information-note-ebola-and-food-safety
  105. https://openknowledge.fao.org/bitstreams/83da28ff-9da5-4183-ae7b-1fd8a011ad93/download
  106. https://efsa.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.2903/j.efsa.2014.3884
  107. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7494593/
  108. https://bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12889-015-1964-2
  109. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2352771425001107
  110. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC12094029/
  111. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/B9780128006054000025
  112. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/227720979_Economic_Commodity_or_Environmental_Crisis_An_Interdisciplinary_Approach_to_Analysing_the_Bushmeat_Trade_in_Central_and_West_Africa
  113. https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/cobi.13801
  114. https://www.frontiersin.org/journals/veterinary-science/articles/10.3389/fvets.2025.1556573/full
  115. https://news.mongabay.com/2023/05/survival-and-economics-complicate-the-drcs-bushmeat-and-wild-animal-trade/
  116. https://www.traffic.org/site/assets/files/16648/caf-bushmeat-vdec-final-07-01-2021.pdf
  117. https://www.nationalgeographic.com/premium/article/bushmeat-trade-alternatives-feature
  118. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2666937423000021
  119. https://www.unodc.org/cofrb/uploads/documents/ECOS/World_Wildlife_Crime_Report_2024.pdf
  120. https://communityconservationnamibia.com/support-to-conservation/natural-resource-management/sustainable-wildlife-utilisation/
  121. https://news.mongabay.com/2020/10/bushmeat-hunting-the-greatest-threat-to-africas-wildlife/
  122. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S246822762030199X
  123. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/282600788_Grasscutter_Thryonomys_swinderianus_Production_in_West_Africa_Prospects_Challenges_and_Role_in_Disease_Transmission
  124. https://www.slideshare.net/slideshow/cane-rats-can-be-a-viable-option-to-bush-meat-harvestingby-arrey-mbongaya-ivo/4557141
  125. https://www.patrolling.org/conservation-vs-livelihoods-the-complex-challenge-of-wildlife-protection-in-africa/
  126. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-021-98282-4
  127. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006320720307345
  128. https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/e177/dac26e55518dd00b7af56c603193984734a0.pdf
  129. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264167223_Improving_Effectiveness_of_Alternative_Livelihood_Projects_to_Reduce_Bushmeat_Hunting_Lessons_from_Central_Africa_Technical_Brief_English_Long_Version_Oxford_University_and_IUCN_CARPE
  130. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1617138122001704
  131. https://conbio.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/conl.12913
  132. https://www.cell.com/current-biology/fulltext/S0960-9822%2821%2900144-5
  133. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/302917669_Is_a_Total_Ban_on_Business_and_Consumption_of_Bushmeat_a_Sustainable_End_Game_for_Ebola_Outbreak_in_West_Africa_But_Why_Now
  134. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0006320719306317
  135. https://journals.librarypublishing.arizona.edu/jpe/article/2357/galley/2516/view/
  136. https://www.jstor.org/stable/43739888
  137. https://www.thenewhumanitarian.org/feature/2015/06/24/bush-meat-trade-roaring-again-despite-ebola-ban
  138. https://knowablemagazine.org/content/article/living-world/2020/are-wildlife-trade-bans-backfiring
  139. https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8689921/
  140. https://faunalytics.org/can-wild-animal-trading-be-sustainable/
  141. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0301479723007752
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
Contribute something
User Avatar
No comments yet.