Scientific research
For years theEnpa He repeats it: the wild boar emergency cannot be solved with more guns, more culling, and more hunting. Today, this position finds strong and well-documented scientific confirmation in a study by Professor Andrea Mezzatenta, published in an international journal. The research analyzes decades of official Italian data and reaches a clear conclusion: the hunting management policies adopted in our country have significantly contributed to the increase in wild boar populations, rather than containing them.
A man-made problem
Wild boars are often portrayed as naturally "out of control." This study demonstrates the opposite. The population explosion is the result of deliberate human choices: reintroductions without scientific criteria, the introduction of non-native animals, the absence of natural predators, and, above all, management based almost exclusively on culling. According to Professor Mezzatenta, hunting pressure has profoundly altered the species' biology. Wild boars, subjected to constant stress, have changed their reproductive strategy: they reproduce earlier, more, and more frequently. In essence, the more they shoot, the more boars are born.
More cullings, more wild boars
One of the most striking findings from the study concerns Tuscany, a region used as a case study due to the quality and consistency of the data collected. Here, a near-perfect correlation emerges between the number of culls and population growth. Not a decline, but a parallel growth. This means that the control plans, as implemented, not only failed to solve the problem, but actually exacerbated it, encouraging the dispersal of the animals and increasing the reproductive capacity of the surviving groups.
A genetic and ecological damage too
The research also highlights another often overlooked aspect: the introduction of wild boars from other parts of Europe has permanently altered the genetic makeup of Italian populations. This irreversible damage has affected body size, litter size, and the overall impact on ecosystems. This is therefore not just an agricultural or road safety issue, but a genuine environmental issue.
ENPA's position
For ENPA, Professor Mezzatenta's study represents scientific confirmation of what the association has long been denouncing. Continuing to rely on hunting as the primary management tool is an ideological choice, not based on data. It serves only to generate immediate consensus but fails to deliver results. Effective wildlife management must be based on science, continuous population monitoring, and targeted, humane, and truly preventative interventions. Integrated strategies are needed, capable of reducing conflicts with human activities without fueling a spiral of unnecessary and ineffective violence.
You May Also Like ..
