It is a simple decision but the ramifications are quite complex. 1 Contestations over the nature of conservation have emerged as key fault lines between the state and citizens in postcolonial Botswana. In January 2014 the government enacted an indefinite, nationwide ban on hunting, covering both subsistence and commercial practices. 2 This transition from a consumptive use model of wildlife conservation to a non-consumptive, reservationist approach indicates a significant shift in the country's long-term conservation and rural development strategies. However, this change in conservation policy is not occurring in isolation, but rather is embedded in a global environmental movement wherein conservation efforts are often constructed as apolitical—a discourse that strips out the ideology and politics of these policies and practices in favor of the appearance of a technocratic approach. 3 Similarly, global- and national-level conservationists often deploy the politically neutralizing rhetoric of the common good in justifying the restrictions and regulations associated with conservation policy.4 However, as Kelly notes, there are instrumental uses for this kind of discourse as, "the ability of conservationists and participating governments to use environmental arguments to dispossess people of their land and resources has allowed this form of expropriation to rise at an alarming rate". 5 Thus, critically engaging with a seemingly technical policy decision provides great insights into the political nature of these choices.