Studies: Impact of Hobby Hunting on Wildlife
The debate around hunting brings together a wide range of interests, often discussed on an emotional level as well. That makes it all the more important to look at the facts, which allow us to measure how hobby hunting affects wildlife and hobby hunters.
The effects of intensive hunting go far beyond the direct killing of animals.
Long-term scientific studies document changes in migration and dispersal patterns, wariness and feeding behavior, ecological balance, disease spread, activity rhythms, habitat use, family structures, and reproduction rates. In addition to hobby hunting, food availability, climate, disease, territories, and natural predators also influence population dynamics. The following summarizes the most important scientifically documented effects, supplemented by studies on individual species.
Those who want to delve deeper into the political context will find the most comprehensive body of material in our dossier on hunting in Switzerland .
Effect 1: Animals Under Constant Stress
In the presence of hobby hunters, wildlife switches into a permanently more vigilant behavioral mode. Wildlife biologists have observed this, for example, in moose in Canada . “Humans are perceived as a threat,” explains Prof. Ilse Storch, Chair of Wildlife Ecology and Wildlife Management at the University of Freiburg.
In science, this is referred to as a “Landscape of Fear” — a landscape of fear in which even animals at the top of the food chain, such as red deer, wild boar, or foxes, live. “Wildlife would rather go hungry than actively put themselves in danger,” says Dr. Konstantin Börner of the Leibniz Institute for Zoo and Wildlife Research (IZW). In other words: they prefer to stay under cover rather than foraging in open fields.
The physiological consequences are measurable. A study by the University of Veterinary Medicine Hannover (Güldenpfennig et al. 2021, Scientific Reports) found elevated cortisol levels in all samples from wild boar during driven hunts. Santos et al. (2018) showed in red deer in southwestern Europe that hunting management factors 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 cortisol levels 6.5 times higher than those killed without dogs.
The hunting method plays a decisive role in this. Tajchman et al. (2024, BMC Veterinary Research) found no significantly elevated long-term stress values in hair samples from mouflons, red deer, and wild boar hunted by quiet stalking without beaters or dogs. The authors conclude that stalking hunts place less strain on the well-being of ungulates than intensive driven hunts. This underscores the findings on driven hunts and dog chasing: the more invasive the method, the more severe the physiological response.
Hobby hunting has caused many wild animals to 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 that 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 alter 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 Wildlife
Effect 2: Habitat Loss Through Forced Behavioral Change
Out of fear of hobby hunters, many wild animals have permanently abandoned their natural habitat. “They avoid open fields and increasingly seek shelter in forests,” says biologist Börner. They are able to judge when conditions become particularly dangerous. In a roe deer population in Europe, researchers observed that the retreat into the forest intensifies during hunting season. “In open fields, activity phases shift — especially for deer — into the low-disturbance hours of the night,” Börner reports.
A comprehensive meta-analysis of 76 studies (Gaynor et al. 2018) concludes that wildlife significantly increases its nocturnal activity under human influence. The finding was consistent across continents, habitats, species, and types of human activity. A follow-up study (Gaynor et al. 2025, Proceedings of the Royal Society B) analyzed spatial use data from protected areas before and during COVID-19 closures and provides causal evidence that wildlife such as wolves and mountain goats consistently avoid human infrastructure, and that this retreat is reversible when human pressure subsides.
Corlatti & Ciuti (2025, Wildlife Biology) show in a recent review that wildlife responses to humans fall along a continuum ranging from avoidance to tolerance to attraction. In systems where humans act primarily as predators — that is, through hobby hunting — responses shift strongly toward avoidance. In Alpine marmots (Zenth et al. 2025, Wildlife Biology), it was exclusively hobby hunting, not recreational use, that influenced behavioral tolerance toward human disturbance.
Hobby hunting thus contributes significantly to restricting wildlife's freedom of movement and reducing the habitat available to them. “Without freedom of movement and genetic exchange, the health of animals is put at risk,” says Börner.
Effect 3: Absent Winter Mortality Due to Supplemental Feeding
Hunting law — not only in Germany — requires that wildlife be fed “in times of hardship” as part of habitat management, which is why some hobby hunters place food in the forest during winter. The problem: “Supplemental feeding eliminates natural winter mortality,” explains wildlife ecologist Ilse Storch.
Winter is normally a natural selection process for wildlife. The strong survive, the weak perish. This naturally thins the population once a year. Supplemental feeding works against this process, as a study from the Czech Republic on wild boar population dynamics demonstrates. When corn and waste grain were provided in combination with strong oak and beech mast years, the wild boar population actually increased significantly in the following year.
The problem: the more animals survive the winter, the more must be culled in the following year to avoid exceeding the carrying capacity of the habitat. According to Annual Report of the Wildlife Information System of the German Federal States (WILD) since the 1990s, the number of roe deer killed has risen significantly, while the numbers for fallow deer and red deer have nearly doubled. More recent data from the German Hunters' Association (DJV) confirm this trend: wild boar kills rose from around 120’000 in the 1980s to almost 800’000 animals per year in the 2020s. Winter feeding is not the only cause, but it is a significant factor.
Effect 4: Disrupted Reproductive Processes
Hobby hunting itself contributes to wildlife reproducing more rapidly. Studies clearly show that wild boar, deer and other wildlife increase their reproduction rate under hunting pressure — for example, by reproducing at a younger age. The more intensively they are hunted, the more offspring they produce.
In brown bears, Swedish researchers observed that they alter the duration of cub-rearing in response to hunting. Some mothers extend the rearing period to remain under protection with their young for longer. Others shorten it in order to reproduce again more quickly, thereby counteracting hunting pressure, as Quarks, the science magazine of WDR, reports.
Gosselin et al. (2015, Proceedings of the Royal Society B) documented another indirect effect: in Scandinavian brown bears, hunting led to increased male turnover in territories, triggering sexually selected infanticide (SSI). New dominant males kill the offspring of their predecessors in order to bring females back into reproductive readiness more quickly. 95 percent 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 from a population, a selection pressure emerges that runs counter to natural forces. The result: populations change genetically in a direction that is biologically undesirable.
Coltman et al. (2003, Nature) demonstrated in a 30-year study on bighorn sheep (Ovis canadensis) found that body weight and horn size of rams declined significantly due to trophy hobby hunting. Hobby hunters preferentially shot animals with the largest horns — and thus the genetically “most valuable” individuals — before these could maximize 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 alter 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 percent higher than under natural selection.
Leclerc et al. (2019, Nature Communications) demonstrated in Scandinavian brown bears that hobby hunters selectively target specific behavioral traits: Bolder, less shy bears are killed more frequently. The result: the population becomes shyer and more fearful over generations, fundamentally altering its behavior and spatial use.
Lassis et al. (2023, Evolutionary Applications) modeled how protected areas can provide a “genetic rescue” effect through the emigration of animals into hunted populations. However, this effect is 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 hunter”
Effect 6: Wounding and “Crippling Loss”
Not every shot kills. A considerable proportion of hunted animals are wounded but never recovered. This so-called “crippling loss” is a systematically underestimated animal welfare problem.
Kuhlmann et al. (2017, Ecological Indicators) introduced the term “crippling ratio” as a measure of hunting-related injuries and demonstrated in pink-footed geese that for every animal killed, up to one additional animal was wounded but not retrieved.
In bow hunting, wounding rates are particularly high. Ditchkoff et al. documented in a controlled study of 80 radio-telemetered white-tailed deer that 50 percent of animals hit by bow hunters were not recovered. Similar wounding rates (31 to 58 percent) were confirmed in studies from Georgia, Indiana, Michigan, New Jersey, and Wisconsin.
Gentsch et al. (2018, European Journal of Wildlife Research) examined the cortisol response of wild ungulates to various hunting methods and found that coursing with dogs triggers significantly higher stress levels than stationary hunting from a blind. Events following the shot — such as the time until the search, the location of the injury, and the behavior of the tracking teams — also considerably influenced the stress burden.
Wounded animals that are not found often suffer a slow death from infection, starvation, or exhaustion. These animals do not appear in any kill statistics. The actual number of animals killed by hobby hunting is therefore systematically higher than officially reported.
Effect 7: Lead Poisoning from Hunting Ammunition
The use of lead-containing ammunition by hobby hunters causes widespread environmental contamination affecting wildlife, livestock, and humans. Each year, approximately 44’000 tonnes of lead are introduced into the environment in the EU alone through hobby hunting and sport shooting.
The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) estimates that at least 135 million birds are at risk annually from the direct ingestion of lead shot. An additional 14 million birds, including raptors and scavengers, are affected by the secondary ingestion of lead fragments in their prey. Pain et al. (2019, Ambio) documented in a comprehensive review that lead poisoning kills over one million waterbirds annually in Europe and causes sublethal poisoning in a further three million. The international symposium “Lead, a borderless poison” (Gorizia, November 2025) currently estimates annual mortality at 2.3 million birds in the EU — a significantly higher figure that takes new survey methods into account.
Since February 15, 2023, the use of lead shot in wetlands has been banned across the EU. In February 2025, the European Commission presented a more far-reaching draft regulation on the habitat-wide restriction of lead ammunition (Pain et al. 2025, Ambio). The ECHA also recommends introducing an EU maximum level 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 the spirit of 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 enact a complete ban on all types of lead ammunition for hobby hunting (effective April 2024). In the United Kingdom, England, Scotland, and Wales announced a ban on lead ammunition used outdoors in 2025. In Switzerland, no comparable ban exists to date.
Effect 8: Orphaned Young and Destroyed Social Structures
Hobby hunting does not only kill the target individual. It disrupts social structures and leaves behind orphaned young. In species with strong mother-offspring bonds — such as roe deer, red deer, bears, wolves, and wild boar — the loss of a parent can mean death for dependent young.
The RSPCA (Knowledgebase) documents: when hobby hunters fail to locate and euthanize the young of shot females, these animals are left entirely on their own. Depending on their age, orphaned young may starve, die of thirst, or freeze to death. The loss of the mother is a significant stressor in many species, and even if orphaned individuals survive the acute phase, changes in physiology and behavior can permanently impair their development.
In wolves, Cassidy et al. (2023, Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment) demonstrated, using long-term datasets from several US national parks, that anthropogenic causes of death — particularly legal culling — significantly reduce pack persistence and reproduction in the following year. The shooting of an alpha animal can destabilize an entire pack.
In brown bears, Frank et al. (2018, Journal of Animal Ecology) documented, based on the Scandinavian population, that surviving bears partially take over the home ranges vacated by shot conspecifics. This spatial reorganization can have unintended consequences for population dynamics and may run counter to management objectives.
Corlatti & Ciuti (2025, Wildlife Biology) summarize in a recent review: the indirect effects of hobby hunting on wildlife populations — ranging from behavioral changes and stress physiology to the destabilization of social structures — are often more severe than the direct removals, and are systematically underestimated in management practice.
More on this: Study shows: wolf culling often leads to more livestock depredation and A 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. This is the finding of a comprehensive study by Jiguet et al. (2026, Biological Conservation), which analyzed 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, Eurasian jays, and starlings were killed as “pests” in France. That amounts to approximately 1.7 million animals per year. The economic balance is devastating: the research team estimates annual control costs at 103 to 123 million euros, while officially reported damages amount to only 8 to 23 million euros per year. Over seven years, the killing costs add up to 791 million euros, while reported damages total 96 million euros. Even in the most conservative model calculation, in which the working time of hobby hunters is unpaid and travel costs are halved, control costs exceed damages by a factor of 1.66.
No statistical correlation exists between culling effort and damage reduction. Neither do more kills lead to less damage, nor do damages increase when hunting pressure decreases. For Eurasian jays and starlings, higher kill numbers were even correlated with higher spring populations, which the authors attribute to compensatory reproduction. Particularly striking: the 62’278 Eurasian jays killed alone represent 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 of the JSG, without ever having conducted 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
Kistler C et al. Fox management should be based on scientific foundations rather than assumptions
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. Studies on the social behavior of the fox (Vulpes vulpes L). Dissertation
Williams N.F. (2025) Causes and Implications of Fox Population Dynamics in Central England. Dissertation, Bournemouth University. Confirms compensatory reproductive effects following hunting: fox populations rapidly offset losses through increased reproduction rates.
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 were killed per year in France. The study finds no statistical relationship between hunting effort and a reduction in officially reported damage. The control costs for all hunted species combined exceed damages by a factor of eight.
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. Wild boar: Evolution through hunting
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 epidemic 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 behavioral 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 of the hunting of carrion crows, rooks, magpies, Eurasian jays, and starlings in France to date. Over seven years, more than 10.7 million birds of these five species were killed. The culls neither regulate populations nor reduce damage; in the case of the Eurasian jay and starling, higher cull numbers even correlate with higher spring population counts.
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 numbers.
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 percent of carrion crows shot in spring are young, non-breeding individuals. The breeding population segment relevant to population regulation is not reached by hunting.
Jiguet F. (2020) The Fox and the Crow. A need to update pest control strategies. Biological Conservation 248: 108693. Called as early as 2020 for a fundamental ecological, economic, and ethical reassessment 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. Quantifies 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 selective mechanisms described are applicable to ibex under trophy hunting)
Pigeon G. et al. (2016) Intense selective hunting leads to artificial evolution in horn size. Evolutionary Applications 9: 521–530
Note: To date, no population studies specific to chamois and ibex in Switzerland exist regarding the effects of hunting on stress physiology or behavioral change. This section will be updated as 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
Learn more: Dossier: The Brown Bear in Switzerland and 20 Years of Bears in Switzerland
Wolves
The big bad wolf is afraid of you
Wolf: Livestock protection more effective than culling, study finds
Wolf Reintroduction Changes Ecosystem in Yellowstone
Study shows: Wolf culls often lead to more livestock losses
Sheep losses more strongly influenced 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 kill behavior 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 promotes 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 migratory individuals reduce genetic connectivity and successful settlement (US Forest Service)
Transboundary effects: harvesting in adjacent management areas shows additive effects on survival rates (Journal of Applied Ecology)
Hobby hunting can indirectly influence movement patterns and thereby livestock damage (Wildlife Biology)
PVA models: hobby hunting, habitat fragmentation, and disease outbreaks together predict persistence (Biological Conservation)
More on this: Dossier: Livestock Protection in Switzerland and Valais Wolf Tally: Numbers of a Massacre
General publications on the effects of hobby hunting on wildlife
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
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
Kupferschmid A. et al. Estimating the influence of browsing by wild ungulates on tree regeneration
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 on hunting in general
Jiguet F., Morin A., Courtines H., Robert A., Fontaine B., Levrel H. & Princé K. (2026) Ecological and economic assessments of native vertebrate pest control in France. Biological Conservation. Analysis of official data on 12.4 million kills across seven hunting seasons in 92 French departments. Control costs (103 to 123 million euros per year) exceed officially reported damages (8 to 23 million euros per year) by a factor of eight, with no measurable effect on populations or damage levels.
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 a growing public demand for wildlife managers to move away from traditional, lethal control methods and transition to more effective, humane, non-lethal approaches. PZP immunocontraception (Porcine Zona Pellucida) and GonaCon vaccines offer scientifically proven alternatives.
Contraceptives for Seagulls as a Solution to Urban Problems
Belgium: Contraceptive Pellets to Control Pigeon Population
Thailand Introduces Contraception Plan to Control 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 Use Birth Control Technology to Combat Rat Infestations
Wild Boars to Be Sterilized in Rome
Spain: Reducing Wild Boar Populations Through Vaccination
Wildlife Management in Geneva: Contraception Instead of Culling
Authorization for Testing 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
The Psychology of Hunting: What Research Shows
What drives people to hunt, and what psychological effects does killing animals have on the hunters themselves? This question has received little scientific attention, but is gaining relevance in light of societal debates about the legitimacy of hobby hunting. The following summarizes empirical findings — without generalization and without equating hunting with criminality 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, nature experience, social bonding, and — among some respondents — the pleasure of killing itself (“harvest motivation”). This latter group shows, in survey-based studies, a higher tolerance for animal suffering and a stronger identification with dominance over nature. These findings come from self-report studies and cannot be generalized to all hunters. (Why Men Trophy Hunt: Showing Off and the Psychology of Shame, Psychology Today; Psychological and Sociological Differences Between Hobby Hunters and Non-Hunters)
**Hunting, Youth, and Mental
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 abuse animals rarely stop there (PETA)
- Hunting fever
- Serial Killers Have Under-Developed Brains, Says New Study (IBTimes)
- When children abuse animals: How parents should respond
- 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 serial killer Frank Gust (PETA)
- Psychological and sociological differences between hobby hunters and non-hunters
- The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness (Erich Fromm)
- Is he off his rocker? (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 weapons (Südostschweiz)
- Cazadores deportivos: ¿Mentes criminales?
- Hunting and hunters: Psychoanalysis
- A researcher finds a specific pattern in the brains of serial killers (NZZ)
- The brain
- Hobby hunters and their brain pattern
- 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: Psychology of Hunting in the Canton of St. Gallen
Related Dossiers
- Hunting in Switzerland: Fact Check, Hunting Types, Criticism
- Dossier: The Brown Bear in Switzerland
- Dossier: The Lynx in Switzerland
- Dossier: The Wildcat in Switzerland
- Dossier: Livestock Protection in Switzerland
- Dossier: Geneva and the Hunting Ban
- Dossier: Arguments for Professional Wildlife Wardens
- Valais Wolf Tally: Numbers of a Massacre
This page is continuously updated as new studies and research findings become available.
