Study: 83 Percent Fewer Mammals in Hunting Areas
The closer cities, villages, or roads are located, the greater the impact of hunting. And not only in the hunting regions themselves, but also in nature reserves. If hunting grounds are located nearby, there are fewer animals in these protected areas as well.
Hunting areas have 83 percent fewer mammals and 58 percent fewer birds than protected areas. A new study reveals how severely recreational hunting affects biodiversity in the tropics.
Negative impacts greater than expected
The negative impact was greater than the researchers had anticipated. “We estimate that only 17 percent of the originally native mammals remain in hunting areas, and only 42 percent of birds,” says lead researcher and environmental scientist Ana Benítez-Lopez from the University of Nijmegen, Netherlands.
The researchers compiled the results of around 180 individual studies that had examined the phenomenon in the tropical regions of Central and South America, Asia, and Africa. Data on nearly 100 bird species and around 250 mammal species were available — covering all sizes from small rodents to elephants. The study reinforces why recreational hunting fails as a form of population control.
More on the subject of recreational hunting: What the research says about this is shown by Hunting fact-checked: the state of research.
The position of IG Wild beim Wild: IG Wild beim Wild rejects recreational hunting. Our model is the canton of Geneva, which has managed without recreational hunting since 1974: without hunting seasons, without hunting dogs, without driven hunts, without high seats, without the animal cruelty and crime that go hand in hand with hunting season elsewhere. What has worked there for over fifty years disproves every position paper by JagdSchweiz. An association that bases its policy on claims it refutes in its own documents is not a professional organisation, but a factory for misinformation.
