Studies: The impact of hobby hunting on wild animals
In the debate about hunting, a wide range of interests collide, which are also discussed on an emotional level. This makes it all the more important to look at the facts by which one can measure how hobby hunting affects wild animals and hobby hunters.
The effects of intensive hunting go far beyond the direct killing.
Long-term scientific studies document changes in immigration and emigration, wariness and feeding behaviour, ecological balance, the spread of disease, activity rhythms, habitat use, family structures and reproduction rates. Alongside hobby hunting, food availability, climate, disease, territories and natural predators also influence population dynamics. The following summarises the most important scientifically documented effects, supplemented by studies on individual animal species.
Anyone wishing to delve deeper into the political context will find the most comprehensive source material in our dossier on hunting in Switzerland.
Effect 1: Animals under constant stress
In the presence of hobby hunters, wild animals switch into a permanently more alert mode of behaviour. Wildlife biologists have observed this, for example, in moose in Canada. «Humans are perceived as a danger,» explains Prof. Ilse Storch, head of the Chair of Wildlife Ecology and Wildlife Management at the Albert Ludwig University of Freiburg.
In science, one speaks of a «Landscape of Fear», a landscape of fear in which even animals at the top of the food chain, such as red deer, wild boars or foxes, live. «Wild animals are more likely to choose to go hungry than to actively expose themselves to danger,» says Dr Konstantin Börner of the Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research (IZW). This means: they prefer to remain under cover rather than search for food in open fields.
The physiological consequences are measurable. A study by the University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover (Güldenpfennig et al. 2021, Scientific Reports) measured elevated cortisol levels in all samples taken from wild boars during drive hunts. Santos et al. (2018) showed in red deer in south-western Europe that factors of hunting management were the main drivers of stress hormone variation, ahead of environmental conditions and individual characteristics. Pedersen et al. (2024, Wildlife Biology) demonstrated that mountain hares hunted with dogs had a 6.5-fold higher cortisol level than those killed without dogs.
The hunting method plays a decisive role here. Tajchman et al. (2024, BMC Veterinary Research) found no significantly elevated long-term stress values in hair samples from mouflons, red deer and wild boars hunted by quiet stalking without beaters or dogs. The authors conclude from this that stalking places less strain on the well-being of hoofed game than intensive driven hunts. This underscores the findings on drive hunts and dog chasing: the more invasive the method, the more serious the physiological reaction.
As a result of hobby hunting, many wild animals have become shyer and more fearful than they would be in unhunted areas, wildlife ecologist Storch also reports. A systematic review on «Human-induced fear in wildlife» (Grigsby et al. 2023, Biological Conservation) evaluated 81 studies and documented: human-induced fear fundamentally alters activity patterns, physiology, fitness and habitat use in wild animals.
Darimont et al. (2009, PNAS) showed in a meta-analysis that human hobby hunters change wildlife populations faster than any other evolutionary factor ever observed in wild animals.
More on this: Hunting and animal welfare: what hobby hunting does to wild animals
Effect 2: Loss of habitat through forced behavioural change
Out of fear of hobby hunters, many wild animals have permanently abandoned their natural habitat. «They avoid open fields and increasingly live in the shelter of the forest,» says biologist Börner. In doing so, they can gauge when things become especially dangerous. In a roe deer population in Europe researchers observed that the retreat into the forest intensifies during the hunting season. «In open fields, the activity phases, particularly in red deer, then shift into the low-disturbance night,» reports Börner.
An extensive meta-analysis of 76 studies (Gaynor et al. 2018) concludes that wild animals significantly increase their nocturnal activity under the influence of humans. The result was consistent across continents, habitats, species and human activities. A follow-up study (Gaynor et al. 2025, Proceedings of the Royal Society B) evaluated spatial use data from protected areas before and during the COVID-19 closures and provides causal evidence that wild animals such as wolves and mountain goats consistently avoid human infrastructure, and that this retreat is reversible when human pressure eases.
Corlatti & Ciuti (2025, Wildlife Biology) show in a recent review that the reactions of wild animals to humans lie along a continuum from avoidance through tolerance to attraction. In systems where humans act primarily as predators – that is, through hobby hunting – the reactions shift strongly towards avoidance. In Alpine marmots (Zenth et al. 2025, Wildlife Biology) only hobby hunting, not recreational use, influenced behavioural tolerance towards human disturbance.
Hobby hunting thus contributes substantially to wild animals being restricted in their freedom of movement and having less habitat available to them. «Without freedom of movement and genetic exchange, the animals' health is jeopardised,» says Börner.
Effect 3: Missing winter mortality due to feeding
The hunting act, not only in Germany, requires that wild animals be fed «in times of need» as part of wildlife management, which is why some hobby hunters place food in the forest during winter. The problem: «Feeding eliminates natural winter mortality,» explains wildlife ecologist Ilse Storch.
Winter is normally a natural selection process for wild animals. The strong survive, the weak die. In this way the population is naturally thinned out once a year. Feeding counteracts this process, as a study from the Czech Republic on the population dynamics of wild boars shows. Where feed such as maize and waste grain was provided in combination with strong oak and beech growth, the following year even saw a marked rise in the wild boar population.
The problem: the more animals survive the winter, the more must be killed the following year to avoid overstretching the spatial capacities. According to the annual report of the Wildlife Information System of the German states (WILD), the number of animals killed among roe deer has risen significantly since the 1990s, while for fallow and red deer it has almost doubled. More recent DJV association data confirm this trend: wild boar kills rose from around 120’000 in the 1980s to nearly 800’000 animals per year in the 2020s. The cause of this is not only winter feeding, but it is a major factor.
Effect 4: Disrupted reproductive processes
Hobby hunting itself contributes to wild animals reproducing more quickly. Studies clearly show that wild boars, red deer and other wild animals increase their reproduction rate under hunting pressure, for example by reproducing at a younger age. The more heavily they are hunted, the more offspring they produce.
In brown bears, Swedish researchers were able to observe that, in response to hunting, they alter the time they spend caring for their young. Some extend it in order to remain under protection with their young for longer. Other mother bears shorten the care period so as to reproduce again more quickly and thus counteract the hunting pressure, as Quarks, the science magazine of the WDR, reports.
Gosselin et al. (2015, Proceedings of the Royal Society B) documented a further indirect effect: among brown bears in Scandinavia, hunting led to an increased turnover of males in the territories, which triggered sexually selective infanticide (SSI). New dominant males kill the young of their predecessors in order to make the females ready to mate again more quickly. 95 per cent of juvenile mortality during the mating season was attributable to SSI.
Effect 5: Evolutionary changes through selective hunting
Hobby hunting interferes with evolution. Because hobby hunters systematically remove the largest, strongest and most conspicuous individuals of a population, a selection pressure arises that runs counter to natural forces. The consequence: populations change genetically in a direction that is biologically undesirable.
Coltman et al. (2003, Nature) demonstrated in a 30-year study of bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis) that the body weight and horn size of rams declined significantly as a result of trophy hobby hunting. Hobby hunters preferentially shot animals with the largest horns and thus the genetically “most valuable” individuals before these could maximise their reproductive success. Pigeon et al. (2016) confirmed these findings in a follow-up study.
Darimont et al. (2009, PNAS) showed in a meta-analysis: human hobby hunters change wildlife populations faster than any other evolutionary factor ever observed in wild animals. The rates of phenotypic change in hunted populations were up to 300 per cent higher than under natural selection.
Leclerc et al. (2019, Nature Communications) demonstrated in Scandinavian brown bears that hobby hunters selectively favour certain behavioural traits: bolder, less shy bears are killed more frequently. The result: over generations the population becomes shyer and more fearful, which fundamentally changes its behaviour and its use of space.
Lassis et al. (2023, Evolutionary Applications) modelled how protected areas can provide a genetic rescue effect (“genetic rescue”) through the dispersal of animals into hunted populations. This effect is, however, undermined by high hunting rates, because immigrating animals are shot before they can reproduce.
More on this: Hobby hunting influences the evolution of brown bears and Study on the “super-predator”
Effect 6: Wounding and “crippling loss”
Not every shot kills. A considerable proportion of hunted animals are wounded but never found. This so-called “crippling loss” is a systematically underestimated animal welfare problem.
Kuhlmann et al. (2017, Ecological Indicators) developed the term “crippling ratio” as a measure of hunting-related wounding and demonstrated in pink-footed geese that for every animal killed up to one further animal was wounded but not retrieved.
With bow hunting, the wounding rates are particularly high. Ditchkoff et al. (1998, Proceedings of the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies) documented in a controlled study at the McAlester Army Ammunition Plant in Oklahoma, involving 80 radio-telemetered white-tailed deer, that 50 per cent of the animals hit by bow hunters were not recovered. Similar wounding rates (31 to 58 per cent) were confirmed in studies from Georgia, Indiana, Michigan, New Jersey and Wisconsin. A summary of 24 North American studies arrives at an average wounding rate of 54 per cent (Report on Bowhunting).
The European bow hunting lobby, by contrast, points to a Danish data collection (European Bowhunting Association, 2005), which finds a wounding rate of only around 5 per cent for roe deer. Important for context: this is not a scientific study with independent monitoring, but rather a survey based on voluntary self-reporting by bow hunters within the framework of a «game report». The US figures, on the other hand, come from controlled field studies with radio-collared, independently monitored animals, regardless of whether a hunter even notices or reports a missed shot. Hunters' self-reports about their own missed shots are methodologically not comparable with independent telemetry. An independent European or DACH study on the bow hunting wounding rate that reaches the methodological level of the US telemetry studies does not yet exist.
Gentsch et al. (2018, European Journal of Wildlife Research) examined the cortisol response of wild ungulates to various hunting methods and found that pursuit with dogs triggers significantly higher stress levels than wait hunting. Events after the shot too – such as the time until the follow-up search, the location of the injury and the behaviour of the follow-up search teams – considerably influenced the stress burden.
Wounded animals that are not found often suffer a slow death through infection, starvation or exhaustion. These animals appear in no kill statistics. The actual number of animals killed by hobby hunting is therefore systematically higher than officially reported.
Effect 7: Lead poisoning through hunting ammunition
The use of lead-containing ammunition by hobby hunters causes large-scale environmental contamination affecting wild animals, livestock and humans. In the EU alone, around 44,000 tonnes of lead are released into the environment each year through hobby hunting and shooting sports.
The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) estimates that at least 135 million birds are at risk each year from the direct ingestion of lead shot. A further 14 million birds, including birds of prey and scavengers, are affected by the secondary uptake of lead fragments in their prey. In a comprehensive review, Pain et al. (2019, Ambio) documented that lead poisoning kills over one million waterbirds annually in Europe and causes sub-lethal poisoning in a further three million. The international symposium «Lead, a borderless poison» (Gorizia, November 2025) currently puts annual mortality at 2.3 million birds in the EU – a significantly higher estimate that takes new survey methods into account.
Since 15 February 2023, the use of lead shot in wetlands has been banned EU-wide. In February 2025, the EU Commission put forward a more far-reaching draft regulation on a habitat-wide restriction of lead ammunition (Pain et al. 2025, Ambio). The ECHA also recommends introducing an EU maximum limit for lead in game meat, comparable to the limit for meat from livestock (0.1 mg/kg). Sonne et al. (2023, Eco-Environment & Health) call for a complete phase-out of lead ammunition in line with a One Health approach: the continued use of lead ammunition threatens biodiversity, human health and undermines sustainability goals.
Denmark was the first country in the world to decide on a complete ban of all types of lead ammunition for hobby hunting (from April 2024). In the United Kingdom, England, Scotland and Wales announced a ban on lead ammunition outdoors in 2025. In Switzerland, there is so far no such ban.
Effect 8: Orphaned young animals and destroyed social structures
Hobby hunting does not only kill the target individual. It intervenes in social structures and leaves orphaned young animals behind. In species with a strong mother-offspring bond – such as roe deer, red deer, bears, wolves and wild boars – the loss of a parent animal can mean death for dependent young.
The RSPCA (Knowledgebase) documents: When hobby hunters fail to find and dispatch the young of shot females, these animals are left to fend for themselves. Depending on their age, orphaned young starve, die of thirst or freeze to death. For many species, the loss of the mother is a considerable stress factor, and even if orphaned individuals survive the acute phase, changes in physiology and behaviour can permanently impair their development.
In wolves, Cassidy et al. (2023, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment) have shown, using long-term datasets from several US national parks, that anthropogenic causes of death, in particular legal kills, markedly reduce pack persistence and reproduction in the following year. Killing an alpha animal can destabilise an entire pack.
In brown bears, Frank et al. (2018, Journal of Animal Ecology) documented, using the Scandinavian population, that surviving bears partly take over the vacated ranges of shot conspecifics. This spatial reorganisation can have unintended consequences for population dynamics and run counter to management objectives.
Corlatti & Ciuti (2025, Wildlife Biology) summarise in a recent review: the indirect effects of hobby hunting on wildlife populations – from behavioural changes and stress physiology to the destabilisation of social structures – are often more serious than the direct removals and are systematically underestimated in management practice.
More on this: Study shows: wolf kills often lead to more livestock being killed and Ten-year-old study, still ignored: why stable packs kill fewer livestock
Effect 9: Economic ineffectiveness of pest hunting
The hunting of so-called «pest species» is not only ecologically but also economically without benefit. That is the finding of a comprehensive study by Jiguet et al. (2026, Biological Conservation), which evaluated seven years of official data from 92 French departments.
Between 2015 and 2022, 12,394,885 foxes, stone martens, pine martens, polecats, weasels, carrion crows, rooks, magpies, jays and starlings were killed as “pests” in France. That amounts to around 1.7 million animals per year. The economic assessment is devastating: the research team puts the annual control costs at 103 to 123 million euros, while the officially reported damage amounts to only 8 to 23 million euros per year. Over seven years, the killing costs add up to 791 million euros, and the reported damage to 96 million euros. Even in the most conservative model calculation, in which the hobby hunters' working time is not remunerated and the travel costs are halved, the control costs exceed the damage by a factor of 1.66.
There is no statistical correlation between the amount of shooting effort and the reduction in damage. Neither do more kills lead to less damage, nor does the damage increase when hunting eases off. For the jay and the starling, a higher number of kills even correlated with higher spring populations, which the authors explain by compensatory reproduction. Particularly striking: the 62,278 jays killed alone correspond to a potential loss of 100 to 454 million euros in seed dispersal services for oak forests. On this basis, the French environmental inspectorate IGEDD recommends not renewing the triennial decree on “pest” hunting in 2026. Switzerland regulates the same species under Art. 5 JSG, without ever having carried out a comparable impact assessment.
More on this: Killed by the millions – for nothing: new study exposes hunters' tall tales
Publications by animal species
Raccoons
Robel R.J., Barnes N.A. & Fox L.B. Raccoon populations: Does human disturbance increase mortality? Transactions of the Kansas Academy of Science Vol. 93, No. 1/2 (1990), pp. 22–27
Asano M. et al. Reproductive characteristics of feral raccoons (Procyon lotor) in Hokkaido/Japan
Beasley JC, Rhodes OE. Effects of culling on mesopredator population dynamics
Raccoon roundworm and baylisascariasis: only 50 cases worldwide
Golden jackals
Foxes
Baker PJ et al. Effect of British hunting ban on fox numbers
Goszczyński J. Population dynamics of the red fox in central Poland
Kaphegyi T. Untersuchungen zum Sozialverhalten des Fuchses (Vulpes vulpes L). Dissertation
Ansorge H. et al. (2010 ff.) The German Wildlife Information System (WILD): Population densities and den use of red foxes 2003–2007 in Germany. ResearchGate. Germany-wide monitoring of fox densities and den use.
Kämmerle J.-L. et al. (2019) Restricted-area culls and red fox abundance: Are effects at the landscape scale? Conservation Science and Practice. Local culls do not reduce fox density at the landscape scale.
Williams N.F. (2025) Causes and Implications of Fox Population Dynamics in Central England. Dissertation, Bournemouth University. Confirms compensatory reproduction effects after hunting: fox populations quickly offset losses through increased reproduction rates.
Ryser-Degiorgis S. et al. (2019) Spatiotemporal spread of sarcoptic mange in the red fox in Switzerland. Parasites & Vectors. Swiss data on the spread of mange, with no correlation to hunting intensity.
Pence D.B. & Ueckermann E. (2002) Sarcoptic mange in wildlife. PubMed. Fundamental review paper on mange in wild animals.
Prentice J. (2012) The perturbation effect in wildlife systems. Dissertation, University of Leeds. Full text. Shows why killing territorial animals tends to promote rather than curb disease spread through increased immigration.
König A. et al. (2019) Effective long-term control of Echinococcus multilocularis in a mixed rural-urban area in Germany. PMC. Deworming bait sustainably pushes back the fox tapeworm; hunting is not a suitable means for this.
Comte S. et al. (2013) Fox baiting against Echinococcus multilocularis: Contrasted achievements among two medium size cities. SWILD. Compares the effectiveness of baiting programmes in two cities.
Takahashi K. et al. (2013) Efficacy of anthelmintic baiting of foxes against Echinococcus multilocularis in northern Japan. ScienceDirect. Confirms beyond Europe: baiting programmes work, hunting does not.
Knauer F. et al. (2010) A statistical analysis of the relationship between red fox and prey species. Wildlife Biology. Statistical correlation between fox density and prey populations.
N.N. (2024) The impact of Agri-Environment Schemes (AES) and red fox (Vulpes vulpes) on the density of European brown hare (Lepus europaeus) populations in Hungary. bioRxiv. Relationship between landscape measures, fox density and brown hare population.
Kujawa D. & Łęcki R. Does Red Fox Vulpes vulpes Affect Bird Species Richness and Abundance in an Agricultural Landscape? ResearchGate. Influence of the fox on bird diversity in farmland.
Spaar R. et al. (2012) Elemente für Artenförderungsprogramme Vögel Schweiz. Artenförderung Vögel Schweiz. Technical report on effective protection measures for Swiss breeding birds, with an assessment of the predation factor.
Korner P., Hohl D. & Horch P. Brood protection is essential but not sufficient for population survival of lapwings Vanellus vanellus in central Switzerland. Wildlife Biology. Habitat quality as the decisive factor for the lapwing, not predator control.
Jiguet F. et al. (2026) Ecological and economic assessments of native vertebrate pest control in France. Biological Conservation. Between 2015 and 2022, an average of 383’299 red foxes per year were killed in France. The study finds no statistical relationship between the culling effort and a reduction in officially reported damage. The control costs for all hunted species combined exceed the damage eightfold.
SWILD – Kistler C. & Bontadina F. (2026) Wissenschaftliche Grundlagen zur Fuchsjagd. Technical report commissioned by the Office for Forest and Wildlife of the canton of Zug. May 2026.
Brief summaries of scientific literature on the red fox
More on this: Dossier: The fox in Switzerland and Fox hunting without facts: How JagdSchweiz invents problems
Wild boars
More hunting leads to the proliferation of wild boars
Steiner W. Schwarzwild: Evolution durch Jagd
Tack J. Wild Boar Population Trends in Europe
Csanyi S. Wild boar population dynamics & management Hungary
Croft S. et al. Review of existing models on spatial distribution and density of wild boar
Servanty S. et al. Factors affecting wild boar reproduction under hunting pressure
More on this: African swine fever: What the disease means for wild boars and hobby hunting
Elk
Roe deer
Trembay J-P et al. Ecological impacts of deer overabundance on temperate and boreal forests
Fred Kurt: Das Reh in der Kulturlandschaft. Ökologie, Sozialverhalten, Jagd und Hege. Kosmos Verlag, Stuttgart 2002, ISBN 3-440-09397-2, p. 83.
Alpine marmots
Zenth F., Giari C., Morocutti E. et al. (2025) Hunting, but not outdoor recreation, modulates behavioural tolerance to human disturbance in Alpine marmots Marmota marmota. Wildlife Biology 2025: e01397
Corvids and starlings
Jiguet F. et al. (2026) Ecological and economic assessments of native vertebrate pest control in France. Biological Conservation. The most comprehensive economic and ecological assessment to date of the hunting of carrion crows, rooks, magpies, jays and starlings in France. Over seven years, more than 10.7 million birds of these five species were killed. The kills regulate neither populations nor damage; for jays and starlings, a higher kill figure even correlates with higher spring populations.
Chiron F. & Julliard R. (2013) Assessing the effects of trapping on pest bird species at the country level. Biological Conservation 158: 98–106. Demonstrates that hunting alters the population structure of corvids but does not reduce overall populations.
Jiguet F. & Gantin C. (2025) Fission-fusion dynamics and spring movements in first-year carrion crows challenge the efficiency of culling strategies. Scientific Reports 15: 31068. Shows that up to 96 per cent of carrion crows killed in spring are young, non-breeding individuals. The regulatorily relevant breeding population segment is not captured by hunting.
Jiguet F. (2020) The Fox and the Crow. A need to update pest control strategies. Biological Conservation 248: 108693. As early as 2020, this called for a fundamental ecological, economic and ethical re-evaluation of the hunting of foxes and corvids.
Green A.J., Elmberg J. & Lovas-Kiss Á. (2019) Beyond Scatter-Hoarding and Frugivory: European Corvids as Overlooked Vectors for a Broad Range of Plants. Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 7: 133. Documents the underestimated role of corvids as seed dispersers.
Hougner C., Colding J. & Söderqvist T. (2006) Economic valuation of a seed dispersal service in the Stockholm National Urban Park, Sweden. Ecological Economics 59: 364–374. Puts the economic value of seed dispersal by Eurasian jays at 3,200 to 14,600 euros per breeding pair.
Chamois and ibex
Coltman D.W. et al. (2003) Undesirable evolutionary consequences of trophy hunting. Nature 426: 655–658 (bighorn sheep; the selection mechanisms described are transferable to ibex subject to trophy hunting)
Pigeon G. et al. (2016) Intense selective hunting leads to artificial evolution in horn size. Evolutionary Applications 9: 521–530
Note: For chamois and ibex in Switzerland, dedicated population studies on the effects of hunting on stress physiology or behavioural change are still lacking. This section will be supplemented once new data from long-term alpine studies become available.
Brown bears
van der Walle J. et al. Hunting regulation favors slow life histories in brown bear
Leclerc M et al. Hunters select for behavioral traits in a large carnivore
Gosselin J. et al. (2015) The relative importance of direct and indirect effects of hunting mortality on the population dynamics of brown bears. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 282: 20141840
Frank S.C. et al. (2018) Sociodemographic factors modulate the spatial response of brown bears to vacancies created by hunting. Journal of Animal Ecology 87: 247–258
Hobby hunting influences the evolution of brown bears
More on this: Dossier: The brown bear in Switzerland and 20 years of bears in Switzerland
Wolves
The big bad wolf is afraid of you
Wolf: herd protection more effective than culling, according to study
Wolf Reintroduction Changes Ecosystem in Yellowstone
Study shows: wolf culls often lead to more livestock kills
Sheep losses influenced more strongly by protective measures and sheep numbers than by wolf population size (Frontiers in Ecology and Evolution 2022)
High survival rates explain 20 years of rapid wolf expansion in Germany (IZW Berlin)
Study by the Federal Agency for Nature Conservation (BfN) on the threat to the wolf population
Knauer F., Rauer G., Musil I. Prey composition and killing behaviour of wolves (Vetmeduni Vienna 2016)
Cassidy K.A. et al. Human-caused mortality triggers pack instability in gray wolves (Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2023)
Targeted removal favours pack dissolution and reduced reproduction, especially in small populations (Scientific Reports 2024)
Fuller T.K. et al. (2003) Sustainability thresholds and harvest influence on population growth
High kill rates on dispersers reduce genetic connectivity and successful settlement (US Forest Service)
Transboundary effects: killing in neighbouring management areas shows additive effects on survival rates (Journal of Applied Ecology)
Hobby hunting can indirectly influence movement patterns and thus damage to livestock (Wildlife Biology)
PVA models: hobby hunting, habitat fragmentation and disease outbreaks jointly predict persistence (Biological Conservation)
More on this: Dossier: Herd protection in Switzerland and The Valais wolf record: figures of a massacre
General publications on the effects of hobby hunting on wild animals
Gaynor K.M. et al. The influence of human disturbance on wildlife nocturnality (meta-analysis, Science 2018)
Gaynor K.M. et al. (2025) The influence of human presence and footprint on animal space use in protected areas. Proceedings of the Royal Society B
Corlatti L. & Ciuti S. (2025) Indirect effects of hunting on wildlife. Wildlife Biology 2025: e01691 (review article)
Grigsby D.M. et al. (2023) Human-induced fear in wildlife: A review. Biological Conservation 286: 110252
Güldenpfennig J. et al. (2021) An approach to assess stress in response to drive hunts using cortisol levels of wild boar. Scientific Reports 11: 16514
Santos J.P.V. et al. (2018) The importance of intrinsic traits, environment, and human activities in modulating stress levels in a wild ungulate. Ecological Indicators 89: 706–715
Tajchman K. et al. (2024) Impact of stalking hunt season on long-term stress in big game. BMC Veterinary Research
Kuhlmann K. et al. (2017) Crippling ratio: A novel approach to assess hunting-induced wounding of wild animals. Ecological Indicators 80: 242–246
Ditchkoff S.S. et al. (1998) Wounding Rates of White-Tailed Deer with Traditional Archery Equipment. Proceedings of the Southeastern Association of Fish and Wildlife Agencies 52: 244–248
European Bowhunting Association (2005) Danish data collection on bow hunting of roe deer, based on voluntary self-reporting by bow hunters; methodologically not comparable with independent telemetry
Gethöfer F., Siebert U. Current knowledge of the Neozoa Nutria and Muskrat in Europe
Comte S. et al. Echinococcus multilocularis management by fox culling: An inappropriate paradigm
Prof. Reichholf: Why hunting? Consequences of hunting for humans, animals, plants and landscapes
Darimont C et al. Human predators outpace other agents of trait change (PNAS 2009)
Wildtierschutz Deutschland: Facts about hunting in general
Jiguet F., Morin A., Courtines H., Robert A., Fontaine B., Levrel H. & Prince K. (2026) Ecological and economic assessments of native vertebrate pest control in France. Biological Conservation. Analysis of official data on 12.4 million kills over seven hunting seasons in 92 French departments. The control costs (103 to 123 million euros per year) exceed the officially reported damages (8 to 23 million euros per year) eightfold, without any measurable effect on populations or the extent of damage.
Lead ammunition: Further sources
ECHA: Lead in shot, bullets and fishing weights
BirdLife: Lead ammunition finally banned from wetlands across the EU
Vulture Conservation Foundation: EU bans the use of lead ammunition in wetlands
Pain D.J. et al. (2019) Effects of lead from ammunition on birds and other wildlife: A review and update. Ambio 48: 935–953
Pain D.J. et al. (2025) EU regulation: An unprecedented opportunity to protect wildlife and human health from lead in hunting ammunition. Ambio (most recent overview of the EU legislative process)
Sonne C. et al. (2023) The environmental threats from lead ammunition. Eco-Environment & Health 2(1): 16–17
Katzner T.E. et al. (2024) Lead poisoning of wildlife from ammunition: a global perspective on regulations and actions. Ambio
International symposium «Lead, a borderless poison» (Gorizia, November 2025): current estimate of 2.3 million bird deaths annually in the EU due to lead ammunition
Immunocontraception: humane alternatives to hobby hunting
There is growing public demand for wildlife managers to move away from traditional, lethal control methods and towards more effective, humane, non-lethal methods. PZP immunocontraception (Porcine Zona Pellucida) and GonaCon vaccines offer scientifically proven alternatives.
Contraceptives for gulls as a solution to urban problems
Belgium: contraceptive grains intended to control pigeon population
Thailand introduces a contraception plan to control the elephant population
Fertility Control for Wildlife: A European Perspective (Massei et al. 2022)
Wildlife Contraception (Wild Animal Suffering Research)
New trends in immunocastration and its potential to improve animal welfare (Ahmed et al. 2022)
US cities deploy birth control technology against rat infestations
Wild boars are to be sterilised in Rome
Spain: reducing wild boar populations thanks to vaccination
Wildlife management in Geneva: contraception instead of culling
Approval for the trial of the immunocontraceptive vaccine «GonaCon» in Italy (Gazzetta Ufficiale 2022)
More on this: Dossier: Geneva and the hunting ban and Dossier: arguments for professional wildlife wardens
On the psychology of hunting: what the research shows
What drives people to hunt, and what psychological effects does the killing of animals have on the hunters themselves? This question has been little researched scientifically, but is gaining importance in light of societal debates over the legitimacy of hobby hunting. The following summarises empirical findings – without generalisation and without equating hunting with crime or pathology, which would not be scientifically tenable.
Hunting motivation: Studies from North America and Northern Europe show that hobby hunters exhibit different motivational profiles: food procurement, experiencing nature, social bonding and – among some of those surveyed – the pleasure of killing itself (“harvest motivation”). In survey studies, the latter group shows a higher tolerance towards animal suffering and a stronger identification with dominance over nature. These findings stem from self-report studies and cannot be generalised to all hunters. (Why Men Trophy Hunt: Showing Off and the Psychology of Shame, Psychology Today; Psychological-Sociological Differences between Hobby Hunters and Non-Hunters)
More on this: The Hobby Hunter in the 21st Century
Publications on the effects of violence on hobby hunters
- Solothurn government defends animal cruelty
- Amygdala and violence (search overview)
- Understanding the link between animal cruelty and family violence: The bioecological systems model
- Childhood without conscience (Der Spiegel)
- Why some people become murderously evil (Die Welt)
- Violence as a source of pleasure or displeasure is associated with specific functional connectivity with the nucleus accumbens (Frontiers in Human Neuroscience)
- People who torture animals rarely leave it at that (PETA)
- Hunting fever
- Serial Killers Have Under-Developed Brains, Says New Study (IBTimes)
- When children torture animals: How parents should react
- Why Men Trophy Hunt: Showing Off and the Psychology of Shame (Psychology Today)
- «Killing can be fun» (NZZ)
- Hunting and Illegal Violence Against Humans and Other Animals
- Understanding hobby hunters better
- Interview: Petra Klages with the serial killer Frank Gust (PETA)
- Psychological-Sociological Differences between Hobby Hunters and Non-Hunters
- Anatomy of Human Destructiveness (Erich Fromm)
- Has he got a screw loose? (Die Zeit)
- The passion of the hunter (Paul Parin)
- Hunting and Illegal Violence Against Humans and Other Animals: Exploring the Relationship (ResearchGate)
- New York State statistics show link: hunters and molesters
- Ohio data confirms hunting/child abuse
- Michigan stats confirm hunting, child abuse
- Preventing domestic violence through firearms (Südostschweiz)
- Cazadores deportivos: ¿Mentes criminales?
- Hunting and hunters: Psychoanalysis
- A researcher finds a particular pattern in the brains of serial killers (NZZ)
- The brain
- Hobby hunters and their pattern in the brain
- Dugré J.R., Potvin S. & Turecki G. (2025) The dark sides of the brain: A systematic review and meta-analysis of neural correlates of human aggression. Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
- Fritz M., Pfabigan D.M. & Lamm C. (2023) Neurobiology of Aggression: Recent findings from structural and functional imaging. Current Psychiatry Reports
- Seidenbecher T. et al. (2024) A case-control voxel- and surface-based morphometric study of amygdala volume in aggressive individuals. Brain Structure and Function
- Yildirim B.O. & Derntl B. (2019) Neural correlates of empathy deficits in violent offenders: Evidence from fMRI. Social Cognitive and Affective Neuroscience
- Decety J., Chen C., Harenski C. & Kiehl K.A. (2017) Psychopathy and reduced amygdala response to others‘ pain: A neuroimaging investigation. Journal of Abnormal Psychology
- Fitzgerald D.A. et al. (2020) Violence exposure and neural desensitization: Amygdala and insula responses under repeated affective stimuli. NeuroImage
- Anderson N.E., Harenski C.L. & Kiehl K.A. (2018) Neural consequences of killing in combat: Amygdala modulation and emotional blunting. Neuropsychologia
- Porcelli A.J. et al. (2022) Neural processing of emotional stimuli in slaughterhouse workers: Evidence for desensitization in limbic circuits. Psychoneuroendocrinology
- McNamee R.L. et al. (2021) Affective numbing in high-violence occupations: Amygdala and insula attenuation during empathy tasks. Human Brain Mapping
- Bekoff M. & Pierce J. (2019) Empathy for animals and its neural substrates: A review of convergent evidence. Animal Sentience
More on this: The Psychology of Hunting in the Canton of St. Gallen
Related Dossiers
- Hunting in Switzerland: Fact Check, Types of Hunting, Criticism
- Dossier: The Brown Bear in Switzerland
- Dossier: The Lynx in Switzerland
- Dossier: The Wildcat in Switzerland
- Dossier: Herd Protection in Switzerland
- Dossier: Geneva and the Hunting Ban
- Dossier: Argument for Professional Game Wardens
- Valais Wolf Toll: Figures of a Massacre
This page is continuously updated as new studies and research findings become available.
LET’S STAY IN TOUCH!
We would like to send you the latest news and offers in our newsletter.
Support our work
With your donation you help to protect animals and give their voice a hearing.
Donate now →
