What BuzzFeed found
In September 2019, BuzzFeed News reported that American taxpayers had been funding armed anti‑poaching forces tied to torture, rape, and murder in parks backed by the World Wide Fund for Nature.
Using grant records and internal reports, Tom Warren documented how US agencies channeled money to WWF projects where rangers were accused of brutal violence against people living near protected areas in Africa and Asia. The article sits in the official record of a House Natural Resources Committee hearing as Supporting Document 003.
“American taxpayers have spent millions of dollars financing armed anti‑poaching forces backed by the World Wide Fund for Nature in areas where guards have been accused of rape and murder.”
The numbers and the money trail
BuzzFeed’s tally shows about $157 million in US government grants to WWF over roughly fifteen years, with around $10 million earmarked for “armed guards, rangers and enforcement.” The Department of the Interior, responding to the reporting, said it was reviewing $125 million in grants related to anti‑poaching enforcement since 2013 and putting some similar planned grants on hold.
Grant documents show WWF planned to spend US funds on “special arrest teams,” intensive ranger training, patrol strategies, “intelligence sharing,” and “informant networks.” Equipment lists included drones, helicopters, night‑vision goggles, and K‑9 units. Some of this money went to parks where WWF had already received internal reports of serious abuses by guards.
The investigation shifts attention from small‑scale bribery or corruption to the way large conservation budgets arm and organize forces on the ground.
Where abuses were documented
One internal report, commissioned by WWF in 2015 and later obtained by BuzzFeed, described guards in Cameroon carrying out “coercive” night‑time raids on villages, looting homes and beating residents, with little or no punishment even when there was “evidence and testimony from the victims.” Despite those warnings, WWF’s Cameroon programs continued to receive US support, including a multimillion‑dollar grant that allocated more than $2 million for armed guards and enforcement in the Congo Basin between 2013 and 2018.
Another WWF‑commissioned investigation into Salonga National Park in the Democratic Republic of Congo found “consistent and unambiguous” evidence that rangers had committed extrajudicial killings, tortured men by tying their genitals with fishing line, and raped pregnant women. During the period when these allegations were being examined, US money appears to have continued flowing to Salonga, including a USAID grant with more than $1 million reserved for armed guards and rangers.
That grant formally barred funding of “military or paramilitary” groups under US law, yet the rangers operated under military courts in Congo, a conflict the story flags but cannot fully resolve from the available paperwork.
BuzzFeed describes Salonga rangers “tying men’s penises with fishing line” and raping pregnant women while still benefiting from US‑backed enforcement money.
How the US government responded
The Department of the Interior told Congress it would take “decisive action” and review conservation grants worth $125 million, stressing that the issue went “beyond a single organization, type of activity, or individual country.” It withheld some proposed grants in similar regions and for similar anti‑poaching purposes while the review was ongoing.
USAID said it learned of the Salonga allegations in May 2018 and raised them with WWF immediately, and that WWF had reported earlier abuse allegations at another reserve in 2017. The Interior declined to say when, if ever, WWF had formally notified it about abuses.
WWF, for its part, issued a statement emphasizing a “long history” of partnership with the US government and insisting its projects comply with federal law. The organization did not answer detailed questions about when abuses were reported or how oversight of armed partners works in practice.
The article leaves readers with a blunt question: when conservation turns into armed enforcement, who is actually accountable for what happens at the end of the gun?
Why this document matters
Because the story was submitted as HHRG‑116‑II13‑20190924‑SD003 into the House Natural Resources Committee record, it straddles two worlds: media investigation and formal oversight. It shows how journalism on ranger violence can reframe conservation spending as a human‑rights and governance problem, not just a question of “more money for enforcement.”
For anyone tracing how anti‑poaching budgets intersect with local communities, wildlife trade, and state power, this piece is a key reference point: it ties dollar amounts, agency letters, and internal WWF documents into a single, traceable thread.
