Tourism in Zimbabwe relies heavily on the Parks and Wild Life Estate and associated wildlife populations, giving these resources a tangible value. Protected areas, competing with conventional agriculture for space, can be justified in the context of a developing country only if their total benefits remain competitive with other forms of land use. In this paper we argue that, by underselling the Parks and Wild Life Estate, Zimbabwe is discouraging the development of an economically important rural resource in favor of its less environmentally sustainable agricultural competitors. Low prices are threatening the retention of large protected areas and the very resources on which future tourism, as a desirable, sustainable form of land use, is likely to depend. Yet, wildlife‐based tourism provides one of the few ways to reverse the trend toward human destitution in Africa's marginal areas and provides a major justification for conserving Africa's wildlife.