The environmental benefits — and limitations — of hunting as a food source

Industrial meat production, including pork, beef and chicken, is a major contributor to the greenhouse gas emissions that cause climate change. It is also responsible for global deforestation and is a leading cause of pollution to air and waterways. My hunter friends assert that hunting is an environmentally preferable and more ethical way to source meat, and I have come to agree.

The environmental benefits and losses from hunting

Hunting is a mixed bag when it comes to its impact on the environment. In tropical forests, for instance, poorly regulated hunting can devastate ecosystems. Large mammals like tapirs and primates are crucial for seed dispersal, helping forests regenerate. When these animals are overhunted, tree populations decline, threatening biodiversity and reducing the carbon-storing capacity of these powerful ecosystems. Research from the Amazon suggests that overhunting could slash the forest’s carbon storage by nearly 40 percent, a chilling statistic in the fight against climate change. (Though it’s worth noting that this is a similar threat to tropical forests as deforestation for ranching, which causes about 80 percent of tree losses annually, thanks to clearcutting for grazing as well as growing feed.)

In the United States, important predators like wolves have all but disappeared due to overhunting and habitat loss. Without them, other animals’ numbers have soared, wreaking havoc on native plants and competing animals.

But hunting doesn’t have to be destructive. In fact, when done responsibly and regulated properly, it can act as a powerful tool to restore balance to overburdened ecosystems. For example, in northwest Pennsylvania in the early 2000s, where deer overpopulation reduced the shrubs and wildflowers that provide critical habitat for insects, small mammals and birds, a targeted deer-hunting program reduced their numbers enough to allow forests to recover and support a more diverse range of wildlife.

The benefits can also directly help humans. In areas with sufficient biodiversity, diseases like Lyme disease, which is spread by ticks that travel on deer, are less prevalent. A 2015 study showed that ecosystems with higher biodiversity were better at naturally suppressing pathogens in general, creating a healthier environment for all species, including us.

Conservation powered by hunters

Hunters don’t just play a role in managing wildlife populations — they’re also key sources of conservation funding. In 1937, the United States Congress passed the Pittman-Robertson Wildlife Restoration Act, which placed a 10 percent tax on all guns, ammunition and archery equipment to provide funding for wildlife conservation. In 2023, that generated nearly $1.2 billion in revenue that went to purchase and manage land for habitat conservation.

Take wetlands, for example. Over the last 50 years, North America has lost one in four of its birds due to habitat destruction, agriculture and climate change. But one group of birds —waterfowl like ducks and geese — has seen its populations grow. Why? Thanks to hunter-funded conservation programs, millions of acres of wetlands have been restored, providing crucial environments not only for waterfowl but for countless other species.

Chris Sebastian of the waterfowl and wetlands conservation organization Ducks Unlimited calls this “one of the most successful conservation stories in the country.” By funding public conservation, and conserving private land themselves, hunters are protecting habitats that benefit everyone.

The limits of hunting

Not every wildlife overpopulation problem can be solved with hunting alone, however. Wild hogs, one of the world’s most destructive invasive species, illustrate this challenge. These animals tear up soil while foraging, thereby releasing carbon into the atmosphere and polluting waterways with bacteria and pathogens. Their unchecked population growth has caused immense damage, from eroded riverbanks to ecosystems on the brink of collapse. The hogs can wipe out a farmer’s entire crop.

However, according to Stephen Ditchkoff, professor of wildlife ecology and management at Auburn University, in Alabama, “hunting doesn’t seem to be able to reduce hog populations. It might work to maintain their levels, but they reproduce so quickly that removing individuals just can’t solve the problem.” After conducting multiple studies looking at hunting as a control for hogs, Ditchkoff recommends combining hunting with strategies like “whole sounder removal,” which involves trapping entire family groups to prevent repopulation. Or, for more dire cases, he suggests the use of toxicants that quickly poison hogs but are designed to minimize downstream effects on scavengers or other animals.

In fact, hunting may have spread pigs in the United States. “Pigs move very slowly across the landscape,” says Ditchkoff. “Pigs have been in North America for close to 500 years, and in that time their geographic distribution barely moved. Then, in the 1980s, outdoor channels like ESPN showed pig hunts, which excited hunters and created demand for the animals, so they were moved to new habitats. After that, USDA maps show their range exploded.”

The proliferation of wild hogs shows that while hunting is a valuable tool, it’s not always a silver bullet for invasive species.

Hunting as a food source

For many, hunting is more than a hobby; it’s a way to put food on the table. It can also be a solution for those meat eaters seeking a sustainable, ethical option that aligns with their environmental principles — and one that provides a closer connection to their food. Hunted meats provide an alternative to conventional livestock and the way it is raised: In the United States between 2012 and 2016, hunters legally harvested more than 480 billion kcal annually, or about 3.2 percent of all meat; the same amount of conventionally raised meat would yield emissions equivalent to that of 400,000 cars.

For most hunters, game meat is a nutritionally appealing alternative to farmed livestock. It’s lean, free-range and lacks the antibiotics and additives often found in factory-farmed meat. It can also offer a new culinary opportunity to try different flavors and recipes.

Hunters should pay attention to any relevant health advisories, such as those in areas of Maine and Michigan known to be heavily contaminated with PFAS forever chemicals. Similarly, while there is no direct evidence that Chronic Wasting Disease (CWD) — which affects some deer similarly to mad cow disease — can affect humans, the Center for Disease Control recommends testing harvested deer in areas where CWD is prevalent.

What you can do

If you’re considering hunting as a sustainable food source, start small. Research local regulations to ensure your practices align with conservation goals. Organizations like Ducks Unlimited or your state’s wildlife department can provide resources on ethical hunting and habitat preservation.

If you’re interested in hunting but not eating wild game, there are great opportunities to donate hunted meats to hunger-relief programs such as Hunters for the Hungry. Not ready to hunt yourself? You can still support the cause by donating to conservation programs or hunter-training organizations that bring new groups into the tradition, such as Hunters of Color. Alternatively, you can volunteer for habitat restoration projects, or advocate for policies that promote sustainable wildlife management.

Hunting isn’t without its challenges, but when done thoughtfully, it’s a tool that can benefit both ecosystems and communities. From funding conservation efforts and controlling populations, to providing an alternative to industrial meat, hunting can bridge the gap between environmental sustainability and food security.