# Hunters' Activities and Patterns of Bushmeat Trade in Ogbese, Ondo State, Nigeria

Opemipo Alaba Ijose

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

## To cite this version:

Opemipo Alaba Ijose. Hunters' Activities and Patterns of Bushmeat Trade in Ogbese, Ondo State, Nigeria. Nigerian Journal of Wildlife Management, 2018, 2 (1), pp.37-47. hal-04183571

HAL Id: hal-04183571

https://hal.science/hal-04183571v1

Submitted on 31 Aug 2023

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons CC BY 4.0 - Attribution - International License
# Hunters' Activities and Patterns of Bushmeat Trade in Ogbese, Ondo State, Nigeria.

Ijose, O.A.

Department of Wildlife and Ecotourism Management,
University of Ibadan, Nigeria
Email:ijoseope@yahoo.com

## Abstract

Surveyed of hunters' activities and patterns of bushmeat trade in Ogbese town, Ondo State was conducted. Thirty (30) registered hunters were selected for the study. Data were obtained using through open ended questionnaire and interview. Results showed that all the hunters sampled (100%) were male, 50% were within 31-40 years old, 90% were married, they were mostly Christians (70%) and 40% had primary education. In addition, 70% were also farmers apart from being hunters while 50% had above 30 years of hunting experience. Subsequently, 70% engaged in both commercial and household hunting and also used guns to hunt. Furthermore, 50% hunt daily and 90% sell bushmeat to marketers while 60% hunt to sustain income, 60% sponsored their children's education with the profit made. 36.7% indicated A05 forest as preferred hunting forest. However, 7 species of bushmeat were commonly hunted. The study recommends that domestication and wildlife farming should be set up as an empowerment program at Ogbese.

**Keywords:** Bushmeat, hunting, pattern, trade, Ogbese.

## Introduction

The tropical forests ecosystems of West-Central Africa are considered to be some of the most biologically diverse in the world (Mittermeier et al., 1999). Wildlife populations in the past were sufficient to fill the needs of hunters and their families as hunting was practiced for the sole purposes of local consumption. The forests at this time were productive enough to reproduce the small amount that was lost to hunting. Since then, hunting accessibility has increased and dependence upon bushmeat as a resource has grown considerably, subsequently intensifying the exploitation of wildlife. Bushmeat has supplemented Africans' sustenance needs for over a long period of time (Bowman, 2001).

There has been rapid rate of increase in population size from 224 million in 1950 to nearly 906 million in 2005 (UN, 2004). This four-fold population increase has added

to not only the number of hunters but also the number of people, mostly rural relying upon wildlife as a nutritional resource (Caspary, 2001, Wilkie, 2001). This extremely huge reliance of rural people upon bushmeat has made hunting practices unsustainable throughout these regions. Hunting is said to be sustainable when the number of animals (of a species) killed has no effect on the productivity of the species, thus maintaining stable populations of the species (Bowen-Jones, Brown, & Robinson, 2002, Millner-Gulland, 2001). The increase in the market demands for bushmeat as a commodity has resulted in hunting efforts that go far beyond meeting the needs of the household alone (Bowen-Jones et al., 2002). One study conducted in the Democratic Republic of the Congo found that just 10% of the total bushmeat hunted by a household is actually consumed by that household; the remaining 90% is sold to
maximise profit (de Merode, Homewood, & Cowlishaw, 2003, Brown & Williams, 2003).

Bushmeat is conversely a luxury item to urban populations who consume bushmeat for cultural and traditional reasons, other than solely as a protein source. The sales of bushmeat under these conditions command a high price, at times, three times higher than the price of conventional meat substitutes (Bowen-Jones et al., 2003, Wilkie & Carpenter, 1999). Strong market demands for bushmeat, and the increasing ability to meet those demands, encourages rural West-Central Africans to harvest as much bushmeat as possible to maximize their profits from hunting efforts. The bushmeat trade now generates reasonable income for all individuals who engaged in the trade, serving as supplemental income for many rural households throughout West-Central Africa (Davies, 2002, Wilkie & Carpenter, 1999). However, to ignore the important role this resource plays is to ignore its depletion and eventual disappearance. There is high reliance upon bushmeat, yet there is nothing done to address the wellbeing, and maintenance of this resource. Loss of this important resource and the subsequent effects of such a loss on rural populations is an important consideration.

In West-Central Africa, many wildlife species are affected by bushmeat hunting (Eves & Bakarr, 2001). The bushmeat trade directly poses danger on eighty-four mammalian species in this region (IUCN, 1996, Bowen-Jones et al., 2002). Fa et al. (2002) reported that 60% of mammalian species are hunted at a rate at which their population cannot be supported. Some wild species in this region are hunted at a magnitude up to fourteen times their expected sustainable level (Bowman, 2001). These over-harvested species include many that are threatened or endangered, magnifying the gravity of the bushmeat crisis. Large-bodied games, most especially primate species, are the most affected (Wilkie & Carpenter, 1999). Africa is expected to lose more than 50% of its primate species (Colishaw, 1999). If this practice continues unbounded, species could vanish forever, losing a priceless component of the environment.

In Nigeria, despite the fact that Nigerian government had over the years promulgated a number of environmental protection laws including Endangered Species Acts of 1985 which prohibits capturing, killing and trading in certain species of wild animals whose population are either threatened or endangered with relevant sanctions for the violators, hunting of wild animals has continued unabated. Ayodele (1992) revealed that 15% of animal protein consumed by rural dwellers of Southern Nigeria is obtained from bushmeat and this was valued at over Nine million naira per annum. Ayodele et al. (1999) also postulated that the supply of bushmeat from wild sources no doubt serves as the only possible measure to bridge the gap between livestock production and human population growth. As a result of contravening several international environmental laws and treaties, Nigeria in 2008 was slammed by Convention on International Trade for Endangered Species of wild animals (CITES) and later readmitted in 2011 (Mohammed, 2013), following reported cases of unregulated hunting and trafficking of endangered species. In view of these challenges posed on the wildlife of Ogbese area by the bushmeat trade, this study intends to describe the socio-economic characteristics of hunters, to determine the hunting pattern of bushmeat, identify forests implicated in hunting activities and to highlight the species of bushmeat offered for sale.

## Materials and Methods

### Study Area

The study was conducted in Ogbese, Akure North Local Government, Ondo State. The communities under Akure North Local Government include Oba - Ile, Ayede Ogbese, Iju- Itaogboolu, Owode, Eleyowo and Ilu abo. Ogbese town is a transitional boundary town between the Akure, the capital city and Owo Local Government Area. Ogbese area is predominantly known for bushmeat markets. The area belongs to the tropical forest with rainfall of about 1500mm annually spreading through April – October. It has a maximum temperature range of between 27°C - 32° conducted by Ondo State Agro climate tropical and Ecological monitoring, as cited by Olagunju et al. (2007). Among food crops grown are maize, yam, cassava, plantain, cocoyam as
well as cash crops such as oil palm, coffee, cashew, citrus, kolanut, cocoa and fish farming.

## Data Collection and Analysis

Purposive sampling technique was used to select Ogbese town in Akure North Local Government Area based on the intensity of bushmeat trade. Ogbese major market (Oja Ogbese) was purposively selected for acquisition of data because it is the place where the exchange of bushmeat by the hunters and the marketers take place. A preliminary survey of the community indicated that there were 42 registered hunters in the area. Primary data were collected with the use of open-ended questionnaires administered to 30 out of 42 registered hunters in the area. In-depth interviews were conducted with key informants i.e. the chairman of hunters'

association and 17 bushmeat marketers. Data collected with questionnaires were respondents' socio-economic variables such as age, gender, marital status, educational level, nature of job, secondary job and years of experience in hunting. Descriptive statistics was used to describe and summarise the data. This involves the use of frequency tables and percentages.

## Results

### Socio-demographic characteristics of hunters

Hunter's socio-demographic factors as shown in Table 1 indicated that all the hunters (100%) sampled were all male, 50% were married, 90% were within the age range of 31-40 years, 70% were Christians, 40% had primary school education, 70% of the hunters were also farmers while 50% had up to 30 years and above hunting experience.

<table><caption>Table 1: Socio demographic characteristics of bushmeat hunters (n=30)</caption><thead><tr><th>Variables</th><th>Frequency</th><th>Percentage</th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td><strong>Gender</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Male</td><td>30</td><td>100</td></tr><tr><td>Female</td><td>0</td><td>0</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Age</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>20-30</td><td>3</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td>31-40</td><td>15</td><td>50</td></tr><tr><td>41-50</td><td>6</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>&gt;50</td><td>6</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Marital status</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Married</td><td>27</td><td>90</td></tr><tr><td>Single</td><td>3</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Religion</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Christian</td><td>21</td><td>70</td></tr><tr><td>Muslim</td><td>6</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>Traditionalist</td><td>3</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Educational background</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Primary</td><td>12</td><td>40</td></tr><tr><td>Secondary</td><td>9</td><td>30</td></tr><tr><td>Tertiary</td><td>3</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td>No formal education</td><td>6</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Nature of hunting occupation</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Full time</td><td>3</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td>Per time</td><td>27</td><td>90</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Secondary occupation</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>Farming</td><td>21</td><td>70</td></tr><tr><td>Trading</td><td>6</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>Artisan</td><td>3</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td><strong>Hunting experience (years)</strong></td><td></td><td></td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>3</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>3</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td>25</td><td>3</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td>26</td><td>6</td><td>20</td></tr><tr><td>30</td><td>3</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td>35</td><td>9</td><td>30</td></tr><tr><td>78</td><td>3</td><td>10</td></tr></tbody></table>
The purpose for hunting is presented in Figure 1, it indicates that 70% hunters engaged in hunting for both commercial and household consumption, 20% for

commercial, while 10% of the respondents carried out hunting for household consumption

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>Figure 1: Scale of Hunting Purpose (n=30)</figcaption></figure>

Tools for hunting are presented in Figure 2. It shows that 70% of the hunters used guns and firearms to hunt, 10% of them used

bow and arrow while the remaining (20%) admitted to using traps and snares

<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>Figure 2: Types of hunting tool (n=30)</figcaption></figure>
Table 2 shows that 83.3% the hunters indicated that bushmeat were mostly

abundant during the dry season while 16.7% indicated wet season.

<table><caption>Table 2: Seasons of bushmeat abundance (n=30)</caption><thead><tr><td>Seasons</td><td>Frequency</td><td>Percentage</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Dry</td><td>25</td><td>83.3</td></tr><tr><td>Wet</td><td>5</td><td>16.7</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>10</td><td>100</td></tr></tbody></table>

In Figure 3, 50% of the hunters engaged in daily hunting, 40% hunted weekly and the 10% hunted occasionally.

<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>Figure 3: Hunting frequency (n=30)</figcaption></figure>

The breakdown of hunters preferred hunting time is illustrated in Figure 4. It shows that 50% hunted bushmeat at night, 30% hunted during the day while 20% hunted both during the day and night. Table 2 shows that 90% hunters sold their bushmeat

to marketers while 10% sold to restaurant owners. Figure 6 shows that 80% of the hunters stated that varying sizes of the bushmeat determined the price while to 20%, rarity of the animals determined how much they sell to customers.

<caption>Figure 4: Preferred hunting period (n=30)</caption>

<table><caption>Table 2: Buyers of bushmeat</caption><thead><tr><td>Who do you sell hunted bushmeat to?</td><td>Frequency</td><td>Percentage</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Marketers</td><td>27</td><td>90</td></tr><tr><td>Restaurant</td><td>3</td><td>10</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>10</td><td>100</td></tr></tbody></table>

Source: Field Source, 2017
<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>Figure 6: Determinants of bushmeat sales price (n=30)</figcaption></figure>

Table 5 presents the various prices of bushmeat sold at Ogbese Market.it was evident that Maxwell duiker/Etu (*Cephalophus maxweli*) was sold for ₦5,000, Grasscutter/Oya (*Thryonomys swinderianus*) was sold for ₦3,000, Giant rat/Okete (*Cricetomys gambianus*) was sold for ₦1,000, Pangolin/Akika (*Manis gigantean*) was sold for ₦3,500, Mona monkey/Obo (*Cercopithecus mona*) was sold for ₦6,000, Bushbuck (*Tragelaphus scriptus*) was sold for ₦15,000 while Hyrax/Ofafa (*Dendrohyrax dorsalis*) was sold for ₦2,500.

<table><caption>Table 5: Average selling price of various species of bushmeat</caption><thead><tr><td>S/N</td><td>Common Name</td><td>Species</td><td>Selling Price (N) (Whole)</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>1</td><td>Maxwell duiker/Etu</td><td>(Cephalophus maxweli)</td><td>5000</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>Grasscutter/Oya</td><td>(Thryonomys swinderianus)</td><td>3000</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>Giant rat/Okete</td><td>(Cricetomys gambianus)</td><td>1000</td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>Pangolin/Akika</td><td>(Manis gigantean)</td><td>3500</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>Mona monkey/Obo</td><td>(Cercopithecus mona)</td><td>6000</td></tr><tr><td>6</td><td>Bushbuck</td><td>(Tragelaphus scriptus)</td><td>15,000</td></tr><tr><td>7</td><td>Hyrax/Ofafa</td><td>(Dendrohyrax dorsalis)</td><td>2500</td></tr></tbody></table>

## Discussion

This study established that hunting is largely controlled by men and this may be due to the general belief that men are more energetic than women and this research finding is supported by the assertion of (LeBreton, Prosser, Tamoufe, Sateren, Mpoudi-Ngole, Diffo, Burke, & Wolfe, 2006, Brown, 2007, Lindsey, Romacach, Matema, Mupamhadzi & Muvengwi, 2011), they disclosed that hunting is an almost exclusively male activity, while women are

more likely to do the butchering of the meat. To further buttress the findings, Ekong (2003) stated that women play minimal roles in farming (hunting) among the Yorubas. Majority of the hunters observed to in their active age, this implies that they are still relatively active in various aspects of livelihood including poaching and its farming and bushmeat trade. This result corroborates the claims of Lindsey *et al.* (2011) and that of Lindsey & Bento (2012) in Zimbabwe
and Central Mozambique respectively that most hunters are in their 20s and 30s.

It was affirmed that most of the hunters were married, this could be attached to the fact that ladies show preference to hunters who are energetic and hardworking in the community and has a result, they are saddled with more socio-economic family responsibilities which are needed to be addressed, as a result, forcing them to partially ignore their primary occupation which is mostly farming that comes with seasonal income to reverting back into hunting were a daily income to care for their homes is guaranteed. This is parallel with the findings of Brown (2007) who stated that, in some cases, hunters enjoy elevated social status as a result of their profession. In the Dande area of Zimbabwe and the Luangwa Valley of Zambia, hunters are esteemed due to providing meat to village leaders and to the capable, elderly, or female-headed households (Barnett, 2002).

Christianity was seen to be the dominating religion among the hunters, this indicating a very high preference for Western religion and abandonment of the traditional African religion which to an extent has customs and beliefs that protect certain species of wildlife from exploitation, the implication in essence saw more species been depleted as against the local laws and norms which were not put into consideration by th hunters. This affirmed the findings of Ormsby & Edelman (2010) and Eneji, Ntamu, Ben, Bassey, & Williams (2012) who stated that Christianity influences the eroding way of African traditional beliefs and weakens the protection and conservation of sacred forests and grooves in Africa. The relatively low educational status of the respondents implies that they are not enlightened enough to know the consequences associated irrational exploitation of the forests.

Furthermore, it could be said that most of the hunters in their early stage of life were not exposed to western education simply because of inadequate funding or sponsors to support them. This statement is validated by the findings of Loibooki, Hofer, Campbell, & East (2002), that of Nyahongo, East, Mturi, & Hofer (2005), Lindsey et al. (2011) and Lindsey & Bento (2012) that in many cases, illegal hunters are poor, with low levels of education.

Majority of the hunters engaged in hunting as a per time business because income alternatives to hunting are scarce in rural villages as asserted by (Elliott, 2002, de Merode et al., 2004) and, where available, can be short term and unpredictable, which can lead young men to hunt rather than engaging in potentially less profitable activities (e.g. cocoa farming) (Solly, 2001). Farming was perceived to be the major occupation in the study area but the returns from farming was low so it has to be augmented with hunting, this result conforms with the finding of Caspary (2001), in Cote d'Ivoire who stated that 90% of hunters work in the agricultural sector and supplement profits from agriculture with bushmeat. Majority of the hunters were observed to have over 30 years of experience, years of experience has to do with how long hunters in that community have been hunting without restrictions thereby passing it to the younger ones coming, this has posed sever threats to the forest reserves around Ogbese.

It was affirmed in this study that most of the hunters engaged in commercial hunting to generate income to support their family wellbeing which aligns with the findings of Auzel and Wilkie (2000) who claimed that some village hunters specialize in commercial, typically illegal, hunting to supply consumers in forestry concessions, mining camps and urban areas.

The main tools used for hunting by hunters are guns and firearms, the full time hunters use firearms, locally manufactured loader guns, conventional sport hunting guns. The observation was supported by the claims of Wilkie and Carpenter (1999) who stated that rural West-Central Africans are not only more numerous, but they are better equipped than ever to effectively harvest bushmeat. In rural Maputo District, illegal hunters use semi-automatic weapons to supply a lucrative trade to Maputo city (Barnett, 1998). Advances in weapon technology have provided increasingly efficient means for hunters to exploit wildlife resources. Modern hunting tools increase potential rates of return on hunting efforts up to 25 times the rate of return on traditional hunting weaponry.

This study showed that supply of bushmeat was in abundance during the dry season as a result of the fact that wild animals do come
out often in search of water to drink because most of the leaves, plant and shrubs present in the wild must have been dried already and most of the water body are dried too, they move out in mass from their covered abode in search of water where their safety is not guaranteed thereby easily exposing them to hunting. This finding corroborated with the assertion of Brown (2007) and Lindsey et al. (2011) who stated that there are consistent temporal patterns in the frequency of bushmeat hunting. In some areas, peaks occur in the late dry season when wildlife is concentrated around water sources. This study showed that hunting is mostly carried out every day and in the night as a result of the presence of moonlight which illuminate the forest while hunting, also, the quietness of the jungle which makes it very easy for any movement by animals to be noticed. This result correlates with the study carried out in Savū Valley Conservancy and Mundayana where there are peaks in hunting during periods of moonlight, when hunters are more able to see and (in the case of Mundayana) on rainy nights, presumably due to reduced risks of being apprehended (Lindsey et al., 2011).

The study further explained that hunters constantly sell their bushmeat as a whole to marketers so as to maximise profit and cut cost from relative processing activities that is involved in final processing of bushmeat. The proximity from the hunting ground to the location of exchange is also near which aids the transaction. This finding was supported with the studies of Lindsey et al. (2011) Lindsey & Bento (2012) who stated that where bushmeat is purchased close to the hunting ground, buyers tend to be those with cash incomes, such as marketers and business people. Sizes was identified to be the major determinant of bushmeat prices in the study area, the bigger the animal hunted the higher the price it commands. This was the reason why hunters make use of guns and firearms so as to hunt big games to get more profit, this is similar to the study done in the Amazon, where hunters tend to extract large bodied game from mature forests, even though the capture rates per unit of hunter effort are relatively low (Gavin, 2007; Parry et al., 2009).

From the in-depth interviews, It was revealed that aside from the fact that the hunters were known to be the major actors

propelling the bushmeat trade, some farmers categorically stated that the major issue they face on their farmland is that which resulted from human-wildlife conflict through crop raiding by pest animals such as primates. To further address this situation, most of them rely on the use of traps and poisonous to curb animals' activities on their farmland thinking that would solve the situation, in fact some hunters who could not do that said they employ the services of registered hunters to come and kill the problem animals on their behalf. The information received from them established the fact that this act is frequently perpetrated to sustain their maximum farm produce yield or else they would eventually fall in serious debt and this act specifically seriously alters the existence of wild species of animal who majorly depend on the farm produce for survival. It was clearly stated by the hunters that most times when bushmeat sales tend not to be booming, it could be as a result of the fact that they are broke to acquire the tools and equipment needed to facilitate hunting such as guns and bullets, in return, the bushmeat marketers tend to provide them with small loan to get those materials and hunt which at the end of the day would be deducted from the total bushmeat sales transacted between the hunters and the marketers. From this analysis, it is obvious that the bushmeat trade in Ogbese area is a win-win situation for the major actors but unfortunate for the wildlife. Subsequently, the bushmeat marketers established their bushmeat supply in most and critical cases were also sourced from unregistered hunters who in most cases avoid coming to the market square so as to dodge the payment stipulated by hunters' association in that locality. The marketers said they have meeting point in the heart of the forests where they meet these set of hunters and business is quietly made. During the interview granted, to an extent, some of the hunters showed little remorse on getting to know the consequences of indulging in irrational exploitation of wildlife though some were of the opinion that wildlife is a gift of nature given by God so it would never diminish. The reaction gotten from the interview granted to the bushmeat marketers was quite different in the sense that they are seen to be the sole beneficiary of the whole
market chain, they buy in smaller amount of money, process the bushmeat and sell at a bigger price..

## Conclusion

Findings from this study ascertained that hunting business is perceived to be lucrative and thereby most of the middle age men who are farmers found it easier to engage in hunting business to supplement their primary occupation since hunting is relatively non-capital intensive. In no time, if this act is not addressed, hunting might turn out to be the predominant occupation of the men found in this region which will definitely hinder conservation efforts at this location

and thereby transferring its ripple effect to adjacent protected area, Ifon Game Reserve. The rate at which fauna resources are being exploited on a daily and weekly basis in these forests is obviously not encouraging and therefore not sustainable. If this act persists, fauna resources would depreciate eventually in these forests. Since hunting is seen as a lucrative business, policy makers in the state should endeavour to encourage sustainable harvesting and utilisation of wild animals as well developing and implement an empowerment program such as training on domestication.

## References

Auzel, P., & Wilkie, D. S. (2000). Wildlife use in northern Congo: hunting in a commercial logging concession. In: *Hunting for Sustainability in Tropical Forests* (Eds J.G. ROBINSON and E.L. BENNETT). Columbia University Press, New York.

Ayodele, I. A., Ebin, C. E., & Alarape, A. A. (1999). Essentials of Wildlife Management. Jachin Publisher, Ibadan, Nigeria.

Barnett, R., (1998). Food for Thought: The Utilisation of Wild Meat in Eastern and Southern Africa, TRAFFIC East/ southern Africa, Nairobi.

Bowen-Jones, E., Brown, D., & Robinson, E. J. (2002). Assessment of the solution orientated research needed to promote a more sustainable bushmeat trade in Central and West Africa. Report to the Wildlife and Countryside Directorate, DEFRA.

Bowen-Jones, E., Brown, D., & Robinson, E. J. (2003). Economic commodity or environmental crisis? An interdisciplinary approach to analyzing the bushmeat trade in central and west Africa. Area, 35(4), 390-402.

Bowman, K. (2001). Culture, ethics and conservation in addressing the bushmeat crisis in West Africa. In M.I. Bakarr, G.A.B.d. Fonseca, R.A. Mittermeier, A.B. Rylands & K.W. Painemilla (Eds), *Hunting and

bushmeat Utilization in the African Rain Forest. Perspectives Toward a Blueprint for Conservation Action* (Pp. 75-84). Washington DC: Conservation International.

Brown, D. & Williams, A. (2003). The case for bushmeat as a component of development policy: issues and challenges. *International Forestry Review*, 5(2):148-155.

Brown, D. (2007). Is the Best the Enemy of the Good? Institutional and Livelihoods Perspectives on Bushmeat Harvesting and Trade? Some Issues and Challenges, in: *Anonymous Bushmeat and Livelihoods: Wildlife Management and Poverty Reduction*. Blackwell Publishing Ltd, Pp. 111-124.

Caspary, H. U. (2001). Regional dynamics of hunting and bushmeat utilization in West Africa-An overview. In M.I. Bakarr, G.A. B.d. Fonseca, R.A. Mittermeier, A.B. Rylands & K.W. Painemilla (Eds), *Hunting and bushmeat Utilization in the African Rain Forest. Perspectives Toward a Blueprint for Conservation Action* (pp. 11-16). Washington DC: Conservation International.

Davies, G. (2002). Bushmeat and International Development. *Conservation Biology* 16(3), 587-589.

De Merode, E., Homewood, K., & Cowlishaw, C. (2003). The value of
bushmeat and other wild foods to rural households living in extreme poverty in the Eastern Democratic Republic of the Congo. Draft unpublished manuscript. University College. London

De Merode, E., Homewood, K., & Cowlishaw. G. (2004). The value of bushmeat and other wild foods to rural households living in extreme poverty in Democratic Republic of Congo. *Biological Conservation* 118:573-581.

Ekong, E. E. (2003). An Introduction to Rural Sociology. Dove Educational Publishers, Uyo, Nigeria, 167p.

Elliott, J., Grahn, R., Sriskanthan, G., & Arnold, C. (2002). Wildlife and Poverty Study. Livestock and Wildlife Advisory Group, Department for International Development, London, UK.

Eneji, C. V. O., Ntamu G. U., Ben, C. B., Bassey, T. E., & Williams J. J. (2012). "Ethical Basis of African traditional religion and socio-cultural practice in Cross River State Nigeria. *Journal of research in peace, gender and development, 2*(2): 034-042.

Fa, J. E., Peres C. A., & Meeuwig, J. (2002). Bushmeat exploitation in tropical forests: An intercontinental comparison. *Conservation Biology, 16*(1):232-7.

Federal Government of Nigeria (2009). Legal notice on publication of 2006 census final results. Federal Republic of Nigeria Official Gazette, 96(2): 5-37.

Gavin, M. C. (2007). Foraging in the fallows: Hunting patterns across a successful continuum in the Peruvian Amazon. *Biological Conservation, 134*:

IUCN (1996). IUCN Red List of Threatened Animals. The World Conservation Union, Gland, Switzerland.

LeBreton, M., Prosser, A. T., Tamoufe, U., Sateren, W., Mpoudi-Ngole, E., Diffo, J. L. D., Burke, D. S., & Wolfe, N. D., (2006). Healthy hunting in central Africa. *Anim. Conserv.* 9, 372-374.

Lindsey, P. A., Romacach, S. S., Matema, S., Mupamhadzi, & Muvengwi J. (2011). Dynamics and underlying causes of illegal bushmeat trade in Zimbabwe. *Oryx*, 45:84-95.

Lindsey, P., & Bento, C. (2012). Illegal Hunting and the Bushmeat Trade in Central Mozambique. A Case-study from Coutada 9, Manica Province. TRAFFIC East/Southern Africa, Harare, Zimbabwe.

Loibooki, M., Hofer, H., Campbell, K. L. I., & East, M.L. (2002). Bushmeat hunting by communities adjacent to the Serengeti National Park, Tanzania: the importance of livestock ownership and alternative sources of protein and income. *Environ. Conserv.*, 29, 391.

Milner-Gulland, E. J. (2001). Assessing sustainability of hunting: insights from bioeconomic modeling. In M.I. Bakarr, G.A.B.d.

Mittermeier, R. A., Myers, N., Gil, P. R., & Mittermeier, C. G. (1999). Hotspots. Cemex Publication, Mexico City, Mexico.

Mohammed, A. A. (2013). An assessment of Nigeria's preparedness to environmental diseases for commitment to international environmental treaties. *European Scientific Journal.* 9 (32). 242-253.

Nyahongo, J. W., East, J. W., Mturi, F. A., & Hofer, H. (2005). Benefits and costs of illegal grazing and hunting in the Serengeti ecosystem. *Environ. Conserv.* 32, 326.

Olagunju, F. I., Adesayan, I.O., & Ezekiel, A. A. (2007). Economic viability of catfish production in Oyo State Nigeria. *Journal of Human Ecol.*, 2007;21(2):121-124.

Ondo State Government (2012). About Ondo State. Retrieved September 6, 2012 from http://www.ondostate.gov.ng.

Ormsby, A., & Edelman, C. (2010). Community based ecotourism at Tafi Atome Monkey Sanctuary, a sacred natural site in Ghana in Versuuren, B. et al (eds): Sacred natural site,
conserving nature and culture.
London. Earthscan: Pp. 233-243.

Parry, L., Barlow, J., & Peres, C. A. (2009). Allocation of hunting effort by Amazonian smallholders: Implications for conserving wildlife in mixed-use landscapes. *Biological Conservation*, 142:1777-86.

Solly, H. (2001). Village hunters and city sellers: the bushmeat economy in the Dja reserve. Tropical Forest Bushmeat Working Group, London.

UN (2004). World Population Prospects: The 2004 Revision and World Urbanization Prospects. Population Division of the Department of Economic and Social Affairs of the

United Nations Secretariat. United Nations.

Wilkie, D. S. (2001). Bushmeat hunting in the Congo Basin – A brief overview. In M.I. Bakarr, G.A. B.d. Fonseca, R.A. Mittermeier, A.B. Rylands & K.W. Painemilla (Eds), Hunting and bushmeat Utilization in the African Rain Forest. Perspectives Toward a blueprint for Conservation Action (pp. 17-20). Washington DC: *Conservation International*.

Wilkie, D. S., & Carpenter, J. F. (1999). Bushmeat hunting in the Congo Basin: An assessment of impacts and options for mitigation. Biodiversity and Conservation 8(7), 927-955.