Ban private ownership of hunted mammals

Overall effectiveness category Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)
Number of studies: 1
Share Tweet Email

View assessment score

How is the evidence assessed?

Effectiveness

70%
Certainty

30%
Harms

0%

Calculating overall effectiveness category

Background information and definitions

The hunting of some animals may be driven by demand from collectors who purchase animal skins or furs. Banning such private ownership may reduce incentives for hunting.

Study locations

Key messages

One study evaluated the effects of banning private ownership of hunted mammals. This study was in Sweden.

COMMUNITY RESPONSE (0 STUDIES)

POPULATION RESPONSE (1 STUDY)

Survival (1 study): A before-and-after study in Sweden found that fewer brown bears were reported killed after the banning of private ownership of hunted bears.

BEHAVIOUR (0 STUDIES)

About key messages

Key messages provide a descriptive index to studies we have found that test this intervention.

Studies are not directly comparable or of equal value. When making decisions based on this evidence, you should consider factors such as study size, study design, reported metrics and relevance of the study to your situation, rather than simply counting the number of studies that support a particular interpretation.

Supporting evidence from individual studies

A before-and-after study in 1922–1932 in Sweden (Swenson et al. 1995) found that after the banning of private ownership of hunted bears, fewer brown bears Ursus arctos were reported killed. Fewer brown bears were reported killed during the five years after the private ownership of hunted bears was banned (average 0.8 bears/county/year) than during the five years before the ban (8.2 bears/county/year). All killed brown bears became state property in 1927. Numbers of bears killed in 1922-1932 were obtained from national harvesting records.
Study and other actions tested
Referenced paper
Swenson J.E., Wabakken P., Sandegren F., Bjarvall A., Franzen R. & Soderberg A. (1995) The near extinction and recovery of brown bears in Scandinavia in relation to the bear management policies of Norway and Sweden. Wildlife Biology, 1, 11-25.

Please cite as:

Littlewood, N.A., Rocha, R., Smith, R.K., Martin, P.A., Lockhart, S.L., Schoonover, R.F., Wilman, E., Bladon, A.J., Sainsbury, K.A., Pimm S. and Sutherland, W.J. (2020) Terrestrial Mammal Conservation: Global Evidence for the Effects of Interventions for terrestrial mammals excluding bats and primates. Synopses of Conservation Evidence Series. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK.

Where has this evidence come from?

List of journals searched by synopsis

All the journals searched for all synopses

This Action forms part of the Action Synopsis:

Terrestrial Mammal Conservation

Related Actions

Actions	Effectiveness	Studies	Category
Make introduction of non-native mammals for sporting purposes illegal Action Link	No evidence found (no assessment)	0	Synopsis Link
Use wildlife refuges to reduce hunting impacts Action Link	Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)	2	Synopsis Link
Incentivise species protection through licensed trophy hunting Action Link	Unknown effectiveness (limited evidence)	1	Synopsis Link