Why recreational hunting doesn't protect the public, but endangers it

That sounds responsible.

But modern science paints a different picture. At several points, this protective argument turns into its opposite. Anyone who truly wants to protect the population must preserve predators rather than kill them.

1. Ticks: Killing foxes breeds the risk of Lyme disease

Foxes eat thousands of mice every year, and these rodents are precisely the most important hosts for ticks. A study by Dutch biologist Tim Hofmeester showed that where many predators live, significantly fewer ticks carry the Lyme disease pathogen, because mice hide more often and are less frequently infested by tick larvae. So where the fox disappears, not only does the mouse population rise, but so does the risk of infection for humans. As a reminder: according to the Federal Office of Public Health, an estimated 6,000 to 12,000 people in Switzerland contract Lyme disease every year. More on this in the article «Foxes as allies in the fight against Lyme disease».

2. Fox tapeworm: Hunting spreads what it claims to combat

The strongest example comes from a four-year study around the French city of Nancy. Despite a 35 percent increase in hunting pressure and 776 foxes killed, the population did not shrink, and the prevalence of fox tapeworm rose from 40 to 55 percent, while it remained stable in the control area. The reason: young foxes move into territories that have been emptied by shooting, and these young foxes excrete particularly large numbers of tapeworm eggs. Recreational hunting thus exacerbates precisely the danger it claims to avert. Details in the «fact check on fox tapeworm».

3. Lead in game meat: Hunting poisons the food chain

While recreational hunting warns against parasites, it itself introduces a highly toxic heavy metal into our food. Lead-based bullets fragment on impact, and tiny splinters penetrate deep into the flesh, where they are barely detectable. Germany's Federal Institute for Risk Assessment lists wild boar, roe deer and red deer among the foods most heavily contaminated with lead. There is no safe dose for lead. The authorities' recommendation is correspondingly clear: children, pregnant women and women of childbearing age should not eat game killed with lead ammunition. Those most affected are, ironically, the heaviest consumers — recreational hunters and their families.

4. The regulation myth: killing does not reduce populations

Recreational hunting's supposed core argument is biologically refuted. Heavily hunted fox populations compensate for losses through higher birth rates and immigration. A long-term French study shows that intensive hunting actually causes the population to rise and increases the risk of infection by around 15 percent. Those who shoot end up with more foxes in the long run, not fewer. «Regulation» is thus a self-perpetuating cycle.

5. It can also be done without bloodshed — and more effectively

It has long been proven that health protection works without a rifle. Terrestrial rabies was defeated with vaccine baits, and Switzerland has been considered free of it for decades. Deworming baits are effective against the fox tapeworm: in treated areas, prevalence in spring fell from 13.3 to 2.2 percent. And the most effective control of mice and ticks is provided by the fox itself — free of charge and around the clock.

Conclusion

Recreational hunting's promise of protection falls apart at every single link. It does not reduce populations, it increases tapeworm infestation, it promotes ticks and Lyme disease, and it introduces lead into our food. Public health protection looks different. It means: protecting predators, relying on proven non-lethal methods, and ending recreational hunting wherever it does more harm than good. Read more about our demands in the dossier on hunting criticism and on the Hunting Act.

Sources

• Comte, S., Umhang, G., Raton, V., Raoul, F., Giraudoux, P., Combes, B., Boué, F. (2017): Echinococcus multilocularis management by fox culling: an inappropriate paradigm. Preventive Veterinary Medicine 147, 178 to 185.View study
• Hofmeester, T. R., Jansen, P. A., Wijnen, H. J., Coipan, E. C., Fonville, M., Prins, H. H. T., Sprong, H., van Wieren, S. E. (2017): Cascading effects of predator activity on tick-borne disease risk. Proceedings of the Royal Society B 284: 20170453. View study
• Federal Institute for Risk Assessment (BfR): Lead contamination of game meat through the use of lead ammunition in hunting. View statement