Hunting fact-checked: effects on wild animals, ecology and society

Recreational hunting is a controversial topic. This dossier shows what studies say about its consequences for wild animals, ecosystems and society, and where the limits of research lie.

Editorial team Wild beim Wild — 15 September 2026

Studies on the impact of hunting on wild animals and hunters

As of: 18 September 2026. Last updated: red deer studies from the Alpine region, rock ptarmigan, lead poisoning in birds of prey (Green et al. 2022), turtle dove moratorium, current lead regulations in the EU and the United Kingdom.

The nine effects
Publications by species
Lead ammunition
Alternatives to recreational hunting
Hunting weapons and violence
Psychology
How we work with studies

In the debate over recreational hunting, ecological, economic, animal welfare and societal interests collide. Precisely for this reason, it is important to distinguish between traditions, claims and what scientific studies, official data and expert reviews actually show.

This dossier summarises research findings on the direct and indirect consequences of hunting. The focus is on effects on wild animals: stress, altered spatial and activity behaviour, reproduction, social structures, injuries, selective evolution and the burden of lead ammunition. In addition, the page covers the effectiveness of hunting-based population and damage control, possible non-lethal alternatives, as well as further questions on hunting weapons, violence prevention and hunting motivation.

The body of evidence is not equally strong in all areas and cannot always be transferred from one species, region or hunting method to another. That is why this dossier classifies the studies wherever possible: What exactly was investigated? For which animals and under what conditions does a result apply? And where, particularly for Switzerland, is robust data still lacking?

This page takes a critical stance towards recreational hunting. However, its aim is to substantiate this criticism with verifiable sources and to disclose scientific uncertainties. Besides hunting, factors such as habitat quality, food availability, climate, disease, natural predators and human disturbance also influence the development of wildlife populations.

The key findings at a glance: hunting-related disturbance can affect wild animals far beyond the individual kill. Depending on species and hunting method, studies document changes in stress responses, activity patterns, spatial use, reproduction and social structures. At the same time, research shows that high kill numbers do not automatically lead to smaller populations, fewer damages or better disease prevention.

Effect 1: Animals under permanent stress

In the presence of recreational hunters, wild animals switch into a permanently more vigilant behavioural mode. Wildlife biologists have observed this, for example, in moose in Canada . «Humans are perceived as a threat,» explains Prof. Ilse Storch, head of the Chair of Wildlife Ecology and Wildlife Management at the University of Freiburg (Albert-Ludwigs-Universität 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 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). In other words, they prefer to stay under cover rather than search for food in the open field.

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 from wild boars subjected to 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 cortisol levels 6.5 times higher 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 through quiet stalking without beaters or dogs. The authors conclude that stalking places less strain on the welfare of ungulates than intensive driven hunts. This underscores the findings on drive hunts and dog chases: the more invasive the method, the more severe the physiological response.

Recreational hunting has made many wild animals more timid and fearful than they would be in unhunted areas, wildlife ecologist Storch also reports. A systematic review of "Human-induced fear in wildlife" (Grigsby et al. 2023, Biological Conservation) analysed 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 recreational hunters alter wildlife populations faster than any other evolutionary factor ever observed in wild animals.

More on this: Hunting and animal welfare: what recreational hunting does to wild animals

Effect 2: Habitat loss through forced behavioural change

Out of fear of recreational hunters, many wild animals have permanently abandoned their natural habitat. "They avoid open fields and increasingly live under the cover of the forest," says biologist Börner. They are able to assess when it becomes particularly dangerous. In a roe deer population in Europe, researchers observed that the retreat into the forest intensifies during the hunting season. "In open fields, activity phases shift into the low-disturbance night, particularly for red deer," reports Börner.

An extensive meta-analysis of 76 studies (Gaynor et al. 2018) concludes that wild animals significantly increase their nocturnal activity under human influence. 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) analysed spatial usage data from protected areas before and during the COVID-19 lockdowns and provides causal evidence that wild animals such as wolves and mountain goats consistently avoid human infrastructure, and that this withdrawal is reversible once human pressure eases.

Corlatti & Ciuti (2026, Wildlife Biology) state in the editorial of a special issue on the indirect effects of recreational hunting that wild animals' reactions to humans range along a continuum from avoidance to tolerance to attraction. Where humans act as predators, i.e. through recreational hunting, reactions shift towards avoidance. In alpine marmots (Zenth et al. 2025, Wildlife Biology) influenced only recreational hunting, not recreational activity, in terms of behavioural tolerance towards human disturbance. In rock ptarmigan, flight distances in hunted areas rose significantly during the hunting season and fell back to baseline afterwards, while remaining constant in hunting-free areas (Sooth et al. 2026, Wildlife Biology).

Three new studies on red deer from the Alpine region show just how much recreational hunting shrinks usable habitat. In the Central Alps, 243 radio-collared red deer were able to choose their habitat largely independently of human influence in areas where networks of hunting sanctuaries exist (Rempfler et al. 2025, Ecology and Evolution). In Berchtesgaden National Park, hinds in the hunting zone chose significantly denser forest, i.e. safety over food (Eggers et al. 2026, Wildlife Biology). In the eastern Italian Alps, recreational hunting and recreational activity shaped the activity patterns of red deer more strongly than the wolf did (Boer-Cueva et al. 2026, Ecology and Evolution).

Recreational hunting therefore contributes significantly to restricting wild animals' freedom of movement and reducing the habitat available to them. «Without freedom of movement and genetic exchange, the health of the animals is put at risk,» says Börner.

Effect 3: Lack of winter mortality due to feeding

The hunting act, not only in Germany, requires wild animals to be fed «in times of need» as part of game management, which is why some recreational hunters place feed 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. This is how the population is naturally thinned out once a year. Feeding counteracts this process, as a study from the Czech Republic on population dynamics in wild boar shows. When feed such as maize and waste grain was provided in combination with strong oak and beech mast, the wild boar population even increased significantly the following year.

The problem: the more animals make it through the winter, the more must be killed the following year to avoid exceeding spatial capacities. According to the Annual Report of the Wildlife Information System of the German Federal States (WILD) the number of roe deer killed has risen significantly since the 1990s, while for fallow deer 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 almost 800,000 animals annually in the 2020s. This is not solely due to winter feeding, but it is a significant factor.

Effect 4: Disrupted reproductive processes

Recreational hunting itself contributes to wild animals reproducing faster. Studies clearly show that wild boars, red deer and other Wild animals increase their reproductive 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, in response to hunting, they alter the amount of time they spend caring for their young. Some extend this period in order to remain under protection with their young for longer. Other mother bears shorten the care period in order to reproduce again more quickly, thereby counteracting hunting pressure, as Quarks, the science magazine of German broadcaster WDR, reports.

Gosselin et al. (2015, Proceedings of the Royal Society B) documented a further indirect effect: in brown bears in Scandinavia, hunting led to increased male turnover within territories, which triggered sexually selected infanticide (SSI). New dominant males kill the offspring 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

Recreational hunting interferes with evolution. Because recreational hunters systematically remove the largest, strongest and most conspicuous individuals from 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 body weight and horn size of the rams significantly decreased due to trophy recreational hunting. Recreational hunters preferentially shot animals with the largest horns, thereby removing the genetically “most valuable” individuals before they 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 recreational 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 recreational hunters selectively target specific behavioural traits: bolder, less shy bears are killed more frequently. The result: over generations, the population becomes shyer and more fearful, fundamentally altering its behaviour and use of space.

Lassis et al. (2023, Evolutionary Applications) modelled 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: Recreational hunting influences the evolution of brown bears and Study on the “super-hunter”

Effect 6: Wounding and “Crippling Loss”

Not every shot kills. A significant proportion of hunted animals are shot but never found. This so-called “crippling loss” is a systematically underestimated animal welfare problem.

Kuhlmann et al. (2017, Ecological Indicators) developed the concept of the “crippling ratio” as a measure of hunting-related wounding and demonstrated in pink-footed geese that for every animal killed, up to one additional animal was wounded but never recovered.

In bow hunting, 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 percent of animals struck by bow hunters were never recovered. Similar wounding rates (31 to 58 percent) were confirmed by studies from Georgia, Indiana, Michigan, New Jersey and Wisconsin. A summary of 24 North American studies arrives at an average wounding rate of 54 percent (Report on Bowhunting).

By contrast, the European bow hunting lobby points to a Danish data survey (European Bowhunting Association, 2005) which found a wounding rate of only around 5 percent for roe deer. It is important to note the context here: this is not a scientific study with independent verification, but a survey based on voluntary self-reports by bow hunters as part of a «game report». The US figures, on the other hand, come from controlled field studies using radio-collared animals under independent monitoring, regardless of whether a hunter even notices or reports a missed shot. Hunters’ self-reports of their own missed shots are methodologically not comparable to independent telemetry. To date, no independent European or DACH study on bow hunting wounding rates has reached the methodological standard of the US telemetry studies.

Gentsch et al. (2018, European Journal of Wildlife Research) examined the cortisol response of wild ungulates to various hunting methods and found that chasing with dogs triggers significantly higher stress levels than stalking from a stand. Events after the shot – such as the time until the follow-up search, the location of the injury, and the behaviour of the search teams – also had a considerable influence on the level of stress.

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 recreational hunting is therefore systematically higher than officially reported.

Effect 7: Lead poisoning from hunting ammunition

The use of lead-based ammunition by recreational hunters causes widespread environmental contamination affecting wild animals, livestock and humans. Every year, around 44’000 tonnes of lead are released into the environment in the EU alone through recreational hunting and shooting sports.

The European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) estimates that at least 135 million birds are put at risk annually through the direct ingestion of lead shot. A further 14 million birds, including birds of prey 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 sub-lethal poisoning in a further three million. The international symposium «Lead, a borderless poison» (Gorizia, November 2025) now puts annual mortality at 2.3 million birds in the EU – a significantly higher estimate that takes new survey methods into account.

What this means for birds of prey, Green, Pain & Krone (2022, Science of the Total Environment) calculated for the first time on a European scale. Based on the liver values of over 3’000 birds of prey found dead in more than a dozen countries, around 55’000 adult birds are missing across ten species. The white-tailed eagle population is 14 percent smaller than it would be without lead ammunition, the golden eagle's by 13 percent, and the griffon vulture's by 12 percent. For the common buzzard, the figure is 1.5 percent, equivalent to almost 22’000 adult birds. The frequency of poisoning correlates with the density of recreational hunters. For Switzerland, the Sempach Ornithological Institute, together with the Grisons Office for Hunting and Fisheries, has shown that the lead found in golden eagles' bones does not come from the soil but matches hunting ammunition (Swiss Ornithological Institute).

Since 15 February 2023, the use of lead shot in wetlands has been banned across the EU. In February 2025, the European Commission put forward a more far-reaching draft regulation to restrict lead ammunition in all habitats (Pain et al. 2025, Ambio). At the end of June 2026, the REACH Committee of the Member States approved a significantly watered-down version: the transitional period for lead shot was extended from three to seven years, rifle bullets were dropped entirely (EU postpones lead ban on hunting ammunition by seven years). 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 is the first country in the world to have enacted a complete ban on all types of lead ammunition for recreational hunting (from April 2024). In the United Kingdom, the restriction has been law since 1 April 2026: the sale and use of lead shot and large-calibre lead bullets for recreational hunting will end in England, Scotland and Wales on 1 April 2029. Switzerland has no such ban to date.

Effect 8: Orphaned young and destroyed social structures

Recreational hunting does not only kill the target individual. It disrupts social structures and leaves young animals orphaned. In species with strong mother-offspring bonds – 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: if recreational hunters fail to find and dispatch the young of shot females, these young are left to fend for themselves. Depending on their age, orphaned young starve, die of thirst or freeze to death. The loss of the mother is a significant stress factor for many species, 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) used long-term datasets from several US national parks to show that anthropogenic causes of death, especially legal kills, significantly reduce pack persistence and reproduction in the following year. The killing of 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 partially take over the vacated home ranges of shot conspecifics. This spatial reorganisation can have unintended consequences for population dynamics and run counter to management objectives.

Corlatti & Ciuti (2026, Wildlife Biology) summarise in the editorial of a themed issue: the indirect effects of recreational hunting on wild animal populations, ranging from behavioural changes and stress physiology to the destabilisation of social structures, are manifold and have so far received too little attention in management practice.

Long-term studies on European badgers show how long social interventions can have an effect. After local culls, surviving animals enlarged their home ranges, groups overlapped more, and immigration into affected areas increased. Certain changes in social structure were still measurable years later. In territorially living species, the removal of individual animals can therefore trigger consequences that go beyond the immediate reduction in population size. The results are not directly transferable to all wild species, but they do confirm the well-known ‘perturbation effect’ of culling in wildlife ecology.

Woodroffe, R. et al. (2009). Social perturbation and the epidemiology of bovine tuberculosis in cattle. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 276, 2769–2777.

Riordan, P. et al. (2011). Culling-induced changes in badger behaviour, social organisation and the epidemiology of bovine tuberculosis. PLOS ONE 6(12), e28904.

More on this: Study shows: wolf kills often lead to more livestock losses and Ten-year-old study, still ignored: why stable packs kill fewer livestock

Effect 9: Economic ineffectiveness of hunting ‘pest species’

The hunting of so-called ‘pest species’ is not only ecologically but also economically pointless. This is the finding of a comprehensive study by Jiguet et al. (2026, Biological Conservation), which analysed 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 balance sheet is devastating: the research team puts the annual control costs at between 103 and 123 million euros, while officially reported damage amounts to just 8 to 23 million euros per year. Over seven years, the killing costs add up to 791 million euros, against 96 million euros in reported damage. Even in the most conservative model calculation, in which recreational hunters' working time is not remunerated and travel costs are halved, the control costs still exceed the damage by a factor of 1.66.

There is no statistical correlation between kill effort and a reduction in damage. Neither do more kills lead to less damage, nor does damage increase when hunting pressure eases. For jays and starlings, a higher kill count even correlated with higher spring populations, which the authors explain through compensatory reproduction. Particularly striking: the 62,278 jays killed alone represent a potential loss of 100 to 454 million euros in seed-dispersal services for oak forests. Despite predominantly negative responses in the public consultation, and despite this study, the French government renewed the triennial ESOD decree on 21 August 2026 for the period 2026 to 2029; court rulings had previously removed the polecat and, temporarily, the pine marten from the list due to insufficient data, but the pine marten now reappears in fourteen départements. Switzerland regulates the same species under Art. 5 JSG without ever having conducted a comparable impact assessment.

More on this: Killed by the Million – for Nothing: New Study Exposes Hunters' Tall Tales

Publications by species

Raccoons

Besides increased reproduction, compensatory immigration can also cancel out the effects of kills: when territories become locally vacant, animals from surrounding, unhunted areas can move in and fill the gaps. A hunting strategy that only covers small areas can therefore produce short-term local effects without permanently reducing population density at the level of the whole landscape.

Culling-induced social perturbation in Eurasian badgers Meles meles and the management of TB in cattle: an analysis of a critical problem in applied ecology
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

Minnie L et al. Compensatory life-history responses of a mesopredator may undermine carnivore management efforts

foxes

Kistler C et al. Fox management should be based on scientific evidence 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 behaviour of the fox (Vulpes vulpes L). Doctoral 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. Nationwide monitoring of fox densities and den usage.
Kämmerle J.-L. et al. (2019) Restricted-area culls and red fox abundance: Are effects a matter of time and place?Conservation Science and Practice. Local kills do not reduce fox density at the landscape level.
Kämmerle J.-L. et al. (2019) No evidence for spatial variation in predation risk following restricted-area fox culling.BMC Ecology. Experiment with 273 camera-monitored artificial nests in German hunting grounds with and without targeted fox hunting: award-winning recreational hunting changed neither fox occurrence nor predation risk.
Lieury N. et al. (2015) Compensatory immigration challenges predator control: An experimental evidence-based approach improves management. Journal of Wildlife Management 79: 425–434. Hunting pressure manipulated over five to six years in five areas of around 246 km² each: compensatory immigration allowed fox populations to offset even high kill rates.
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 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 connection to hunting intensity.
Pence D.B. & Ueckermann E. (2002) Sarcoptic mange in wildlife. PubMed. Fundamental review article 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 baits push back the fox tapeworm sustainably, while 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 outside Europe: bait 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 relationship 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 agricultural land.
Spaar R. et al. (2012) Elemente für Artenförderungsprogramme Vögel Schweiz. Bird Conservation Switzerland (PDF of the technical report no longer directly accessible). Technical report on effective protective measures for Swiss breeding birds, including 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 were killed per year in France. The study finds no statistical link between kill effort and a reduction in officially reported damage. The control costs for all hunted species combined exceed the damage by a factor of eight.
SWILD – Kistler C. & Bontadina F. (2026) Scientific Basis for Fox Hunting. Technical report commissioned by the Office for Forests 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 an increase in 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
Novakova P. et al. Effect of diet supply and climatic conditions on population dynamics of the wild boar in Czech Republic
Servanty S. et al. Factors affecting wild boar reproduction under hunting pressure
Acevedo P. et al. Spatial distribution of wild boar population abundance: Basic information for spatial epidemiology and wildlife management
Mazzatenta A. (2026) Wild Boar Management and Environmental Degradation: A Matter of Ecophysiology – The Italian Case. Conservation 6(1): 9. Based on official Italian data, the study shows that sustained hunting pressure on wild boar triggers a shift from a K-strategy to an r-strategy: earlier and more frequent litters, higher birth rates, accelerated growth. The management practice intended to reduce populations is in fact driving them up.
Podgórski T. et al. (2026) Impact of hunting modality on social contacts in wild boar populations across Europe. Journal of Applied Ecology 63(1): e70230. A Europe-wide analysis showing how hunting-related disturbance alters social contact rates and thus sounder structure – the mechanism through which social regulation by the lead sow also operates.
Gortázar C. et al. (2026) Wild boar population control needs more than recreational hunting. European Journal of Wildlife Research 72: 36. Long-term population control through recreational hunting alone cannot offset the growth favoured by increasing forest cover, abundant field crops and a lack of food competition. In Spain, the hunting bag rose from 32,000 (1985) to 450,000 animals (2022) despite a declining number of hunters.
EFSA (2026) Epidemiological analysis of African swine fever in the European Union during 2025. EFSA Journal. 28 per cent of the 44,578 tested carcasses of animals found dead were positive, accounting for 71 per cent of reported outbreaks in wild boars, whereas among 531,832 killed animals the figure was 1 per cent. Disease detection relies on carcass searches, not on the hunting bag.
More on this: African swine fever: what the disease means for wild boars and recreational hunting

Moose

Ciuti S. et al. Effects of Humans on Behaviour of Wildlife Exceed Those of Natural Predators in a Landscape of Fear

Roe deer

A recent study from the south-western Alps shows how strongly hunting pressure can alter the spatial behaviour of other wild animals. During the hunting season, roe deer avoided areas with a high hunting risk. Particularly during drive hunts for wild boars, they more often chose areas rich in wolves and stayed closer to buildings. The researchers speak of a conflict of objectives between different risks: in order to evade hunting, animals may move into areas where other dangers increase. This illustrates that hunting influences the use of habitats and the relationships between prey, predators and humans far beyond the individual kill.

Corradini, M. et al. (2025). A Game of Risk: Human Activities Shape Roe Deer Spatial Behavior in Presence of Wolves in the Southwestern Alps. Diversity 17(2), 115.
Bonnot N et al. Habitat use under predation risk: Hunting, roads and human dwellings influence the spatial behaviour of 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.

Red deer

Rempfler T. et al. (2025) Contrasting Daytime Habitat Selection in Wild Red Deer Within and Outside Hunting Ban Areas Emphasises Importance of Small-Scale Refuges From Humans. Ecology and Evolution 15(8): e71407. Swiss data: 243 GPS-collared red deer from six areas in the Central Alps, comparing the Swiss National Park, smaller wildlife sanctuaries, and unprotected areas. Networks of wildlife sanctuaries allow animals to choose their habitat largely independently of human influence.
Eggers et al. (2026) Navigating a landscape of contrasting hunting regimes and habitats: red deer responses to risk and resources. Wildlife Biology. GPS data from 32 red deer hinds in Berchtesgaden National Park, whose home ranges span hunted and unhunted zones: in the hunting zone, the animals chose significantly denser forest.
Boer-Cueva M. et al. (2026) Hunting and Outdoor Recreation Affect Large Herbivore Activity Patterns More Than Natural Predators in a Human-Dominated Landscape. Ecology and Evolution 16(2): e73033. Camera traps over five autumn hunting seasons in the eastern Italian Alps: recreational hunting and outdoor recreation shape red deer activity patterns more strongly than the wolf.

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

Rock ptarmigans

Sooth et al. (2026) Behavioural responses of a gamebird to human encounters across the hunting season. Wildlife Biology. Flight distances of the rock ptarmigan (Lagopus muta) in hunted and unhunted populations in Iceland and the Italian Alps: in hunted areas, flight distances rose significantly during the hunting season and fell back to baseline afterwards, whereas in hunting-free areas they remained constant. The rock ptarmigan is still hunted in Switzerland as well.

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 review 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 count 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 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 per cent of carrion crows killed in spring are young, non-breeding individuals. The regulatorily relevant breeding population segment is not affected by hunting.
Jiguet F. (2020) The Fox and the Crow. A need to update pest control strategies. Biological Conservation 248: 108693. Already in 2020 called 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. Puts the economic value of seed dispersal by Eurasian jays at 3'200 to 14'600 euros per breeding pair.

Turtle doves: what a hunting halt achieves

The western migration route of the turtle dove provides a rare natural experiment. Before 2019, around one million turtle doves were shot every autumn in France, Spain and Portugal. After a three-year hunting moratorium starting in 2021, the breeding population in Western Europe increased by 40 per cent by 2024 — that is 615,000 additional breeding pairs. Along the central-eastern migration route, where only a few countries restricted recreational hunting, the population index continues to decline. Nevertheless, in 2025 the EU Commission reopened recreational hunting on the western migration route with a quota of 1.5 per cent. For context: this is data from the Pan-European Common Bird Monitoring Scheme (PECBMS), not a peer-reviewed individual study, and alongside hunting pressure, habitat quality also plays a role.

PECBMS: Contribution to the Turtle Dove protection (population indices by migration route)
Operation Turtle Dove: A 40% increase on 2021 numbers (2025)
BirdLife: EU Commission gives green light to reopen hunting season for Turtle-dove (2025)

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
Büntgen U. et al. (2018) Horn growth variation and hunting selection of the Alpine ibex. Journal of Animal Ecology 87: 1069–1079. Swiss data: 44,088 horn growth measurements from 8,355 ibex shot in Grisons between 1978 and 2013. Bucks with medium to longer horns were shot more often at the same age. The authors also regard the strictly monitored Grisons system as an example of how closely controlled interventions can preserve populations; the study is therefore also cited by the hunting lobby.

Note: For the ibex, Büntgen et al. (2018) provide a long-term Grisons analysis of hunting-related selection. Dedicated studies on the stress physiology and behavioural changes of hunted chamois and ibex in Switzerland are still lacking. This section will be supplemented once new data from alpine long-term studies become available.

Brown bears

van der Walle J. et al. Hunting regulation favors slow life histories in brown bear
Van de Walle J. et al. The interplay between hunting rate, hunting selectivity, and reproductive strategies shapes population dynamics of a large carnivore
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
Recreational 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 killing, study finds
Wolf Reintroduction Changes Ecosystem in Yellowstone
Study shows: wolf kills often lead to more livestock losses
Wolves can save human lives
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 endangerment of the wolf population
Kupferschmid A. Direct, indirect and combined effects of wolves on reforestation and vegetation development (WSL 2016)
Knauer F., Rauer G., Musil I. Prey composition and kill 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 culling promotes pack disintegration and lower reproduction, especially in small populations (Scientific Reports 2024)
Meta-analysis of anthropogenic causes of death: hunting, delisting and illegal killings alter population dynamics (PMC 2022)
Fuller T.K. et al. (2003) Sustainability thresholds and harvest influence on population growth
High kill rates on transient animals reduce genetic connectivity and successful settlement (US Forest Service)
Transboundary effects: kills in neighbouring management areas show additive effects on survival rates (Journal of Applied Ecology)
Recreational hunting can indirectly influence movement patterns and thereby livestock damage (Wildlife Biology)
PVA models: recreational hunting, habitat fragmentation and disease outbreaks jointly predict persistence (Biological Conservation)
Treves A. et al. (2026) Removing wolves did not reliably prevent domestic animal losses. Conservation Science and Practice. Comparative analysis of five field studies from Slovenia, Michigan, Slovakia, Latvia and the Golan Heights: wolf removals did not reliably prevent subsequent livestock damage; in some cases there were even indications of an increased risk of recurrence in the vicinity of the intervention sites.
Merz L.M. et al. (2025) Elusive effects of legalised wolf hunting on human-wolf interactions. Science Advances 11: eadu8945. Data from the north-western United States from 2005 to 2021: public wolf hunting had only a small effect on livestock kills and none on official culls. The authors consider it to be an inefficient measure. In January 2026, an erratum was published due to faulty kill data; the corrected version is authoritative.
Grente O. et al. (2025) Spatio-temporal dynamics of attacks around deaths of wolves: A statistical assessment of lethal control efficiency in France. Peer Community Journal 5: e128. French Alps 2011 to 2020: kills generally reduced attacks on livestock, but mainly locally and only to a small extent.
More on this: New study: wolf kills do not reliably prevent livestock losses
More on this: Dossier: Herd protection in Switzerland and Valais wolf balance sheet: figures of a massacre

General publications on the effects of recreational 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. (2026) Indirect effects of hunting on wildlife. Wildlife Biology 2026: e01691 (Editorial for the special issue)
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
Mysterud A. Selective harvesting of large mammals: how often does it result in directional selection?
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
Miguel E et al. A systemic approach to assess the potential and risks of wildlife culling for infectious disease control
Pagh et al. Increased reproductive output of Danish red fox females following an outbreak of canine distemper
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)
Stoykova K. Dealing with «invasive» species: a critical analysis from a biological and legal perspective
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. Control costs (€103 to €123 million per year) exceed officially reported damages (€8 to €23 million per year) eightfold, 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
Green R.E., Pain D.J. & Krone O. (2022) The impact of lead poisoning from ammunition sources on raptor populations in Europe. Science of the Total Environment. For ten birds of prey species, around 55,000 adult birds are missing in Europe; the frequency of poisoning correlates with the density of recreational hunters.
Swiss Ornithological Institute: Ammunition lead burdens golden eagles. Isotope analyses prove hunting ammunition as the source of lead in golden eagles and bearded vultures of the Swiss Alps.
Pain D.J. et al. (2025) EU regulation: An unprecedented opportunity to protect wildlife and human health from lead in hunting ammunition. Ambio (Overview of the EU legislative process, as of 2025)
Sonne C. et al. (2023) The environmental threats from lead ammunition. Eco-Environment & Health 2(1): 16–17
Ellis C.K. et al. (2023) Efforts to ban lead ammunition: a comparison between Europe and the United States. Wildlife Society Bulletin
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
More on this: EU postpones lead ban on hunting ammunition by seven years and Lead ammunition: toxic hunting ammunition and its consequences for humans and animals

Immunocontraception: Humane alternatives to recreational hunting

There is a 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 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 to combat rat infestations
Wild boars in Rome are to be sterilised
Spain: Wild boar populations reduced thanks to vaccination
Wildlife management in Geneva: contraception instead of killing
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 game wardens

Hunting weapons and domestic violence

Recreational hunting brings firearms into private households, and this increases the risk of lethal violence against women. Forensic pathologist Alexia Delbreil and criminologist Jean-Louis Senon found in their study on intimate partner homicide (42 cases from the Cour d'Appel de Poitiers) that among femicides committed with firearms, around 71 per cent were carried out with hunting rifles. The reason: these are "opportunity weapons" that are frequently present in the household. As early as 2003, psychiatrist Jean-Louis Terra found that the risk of a woman being killed in a household with a firearm is five times higher — a finding he described as still valid in a 2021 interview with Reporterre.

Publications on hunting weapons, violence and animal cruelty

Delbreil A. & Senon J.-L. Homicide conjugal: Profil de l’auteur et facteurs prédictifs de passage à l’acte. À partir de 42 dossiers jugés par les juridictions de la Cour d’Appel de Poitiers. Sudoc. Among femicides committed with firearms, around 71 per cent were carried out with hunting rifles, as these are frequently present in households as «opportunity weapons».
Terra J.-L. (2003) The risk of a woman being killed is five times higher in a household with a firearm. 2021 compared with Reporterre confirmed as still valid.
Flynn C.P. (2002) Hunting and Illegal Violence Against Humans and Other Animals: Exploring the Relationship. Society & Animals 10 (PDF)
Jegatheesan B. et al. (2020) Understanding the Link between Animal Cruelty and Family Violence: The Bioecological Systems Model. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health 17
Porges E.C. & Decety J. (2013) Violence as a source of pleasure or displeasure is associated with specific functional connectivity with the nucleus accumbens. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 7
Decety J., Chen C., Harenski C. & Kiehl K.A. (2013) An fMRI study of affective perspective taking in individuals with psychopathy: Imagining another in pain does not evoke empathy. Frontiers in Human Neuroscience 7: 489
Dugré J.R., Hopfer C.J. & Winters D.E. (2025) The dark sides of the brain: A systematic review and meta-analysis of functional neuroimaging studies on trait aggression. Aggression and Violent Behavior 81: 102035
Grohs U.: Psychological-sociological differences between recreational hunters and non-hunters. Dissertation. WorldCat
Books: Paul Parin, «The Passion of the Hunter»; Erich Fromm, «The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness»

More on this: Dossier: Psychology of Hunting, What Does Psychology Say About Recreational Hunters?, Recreational Hunters and Their Brain Pattern, Hunting Weapons and Violence: What the Swiss Data Show as well as the category Psychology & hunting.

On the psychology of hunting: what research shows

What motivates people to hunt, and what psychological effects does killing animals have on the hunters themselves? This question has received little scientific attention, but it is gaining significance in light of societal debates about the legitimacy of recreational hunting. Below is a summary of 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 recreational hunters display different motivational profiles: procuring food, experiencing nature, social bonding and – among a portion of respondents – the pleasure of killing itself («harvest motivation»). This latter group shows, in survey 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 generalised to all hunters. (Why Men Trophy Hunt: Showing Off and the Psychology of Shame, Psychology Today; Psychological-Sociological Differences Between Recreational Hunters and Non-Hunters)

More on this: The recreational hunter in the 21st century

Cantonal psychology analyses:

How we work with studies

Peer-reviewed articles, review papers and meta-analyses, official reports, as well as dissertations and specialist reports that are identified as such, are included. Media reports and association statements serve for context and do not count as evidence. For each study, we state the species, region and method wherever possible, since findings cannot simply be generalised. We also list works whose results do not support our position, such as Büntgen et al. (2018) on the Grisons ibex or Grente et al. (2025) on wolf kills in the French Alps. We correct errors. The editorial team welcomes notes on missing or incorrectly cited studies: info@wildbeimwild.com

Related dossiers

This page is continuously updated as new studies and research findings become available.

Wild beim Wild editorial team

All articles are written by IG Wild beim Wild as well as by external co-authors. Research, structuring and editorial processes may be supported by AI-assisted tools.

Support our work

With your donation you help protect animals and give their voice a hearing.

Donate now →