As I am sure you know, some segments of the public, both here in the United States and abroad, would like to ban hunting in the belief such a move would benefit wildlife, or at least that is what they claim when soliciting funds. It sounds simple, stop hunting animals and you will have more wildlife. Is this, though, a reasonable supposition? For an answer we need to look at the wildlife situation in Kenya for that African country banned all, and I do mean all, hunting in 1977. There is no sport hunting. There is no meat hunting and landowners, be they white or black, have no right to kill wildlife on their property. The ban is total and absolute there being no legal market in either game meat or wildlife products. Kenya outlawed all consumptive use of wildlife at the urging of animal-rights groups in an attempt to stop poaching, or so they said.  At the same time that Kenya prohibited hunting, the Kenya Rangeland Ecological Monitoring Unit began recording the numbers and distribution of livestock and wildlife, primarily large game species, throughout Kenya. This included national parks and other protected areas, black communal lands, and private property, mostly white-owned ranches. So has banning all consumptive use of wildlife worked? Absolutely not, instead it has been a spectacular failure. Since 1977, Kenya has lost 60% to 70% of all its large wildlife even in national parks. Moreover, it is predicted that most large mammals will be extinct in the next 10 to 20 years. So there you have it, if you want to eliminate wildlife, by all means ban hunting!