Maintaining the ban on fox hunting : Letter to the Minister of the Environment

According to our information, parts of the Luxembourg hunting community are in favour of lifting or reversing the ban on fox hunting (see corresponding question in the last Conseil Supérieur de la Chasse of 22 December 2023).

In the opinion of the Mouvement Ecologique, this ban must be maintained without any ifs or buts, as there are simply no technically sound arguments for hunting this predator again. It is true that foxes, as opportunists, have quickly discovered that humans provide food sources in their villages and towns, be it rubbish, cat food … It is therefore only logical that the proverbially cunning fox likes to settle on the outskirts and in human settlements and, like many other species, can lead a fairly easy life here thanks to the abundant food sources. Especially as hunting has always been prohibited in urban areas. As hunting has also been banned in outdoor areas since 2015, it should come as no surprise that foxes have lost some of their shyness and can be seen here more often.

To conclude from this that there is a fox glut, as claimed by hunters, is wrong and is based purely on a change in the behaviour of foxes. There are no scientific population counts that would prove an increase since the hunting ban: unfortunately, no corresponding surveys were commissioned before and after the fox hunting ban.
Hunting foxes was banned on 1 April 2015 on the basis of evidence-based scientific studies.
But what is relevant is that the vast majority of the fox’s prey are small mammals, especially mice. This predator therefore fulfils a very important role in containing the corresponding damage in agriculture and forestry. Accordingly, the fox must be protected as part of the food pyramid, just like all other regulators (e.g. martens and wolves).

It is particularly important to emphasise that the ban on hunting foxes has not led to an increase in fox tapeworm; on the contrary, the infestation of foxes with this dreaded parasite has fallen sharply since then. While 29% of foxes were still infested with echinococcosis in 2014, only 13.8% were infested in 2022, according to the veterinary administration.

Infestation of foxes with echinococcosis

(htps://www.researchgate.net/publication/319975551_Echinococcus_multilocularis_management_  by_fox_culling_An_inappropriate_paradigm):

1990: 5.1 %

2001-2005: 21.6%

2006-2013: 2014 25.9%

Up until 2013, this infestation was almost parallel to the development in neighbouring countries.

Since the hunting ban in 2015, there has been a steady decline in the infestation in Luxembourg. This finding is also consistent with all scientific studies on the impact of hunting on foxes. Hunting destroys the social structure of fox populations and the territorial behaviour of the species: a dominant male fox defends a territory with 2-4 females, usually mating with only 1 female. With intensive hunting, all surviving females are mated, which increases the proportion of young foxes in the surviving population. As these young animals are more susceptible to infection and migrate to the empty territories, the spread of the fox tapeworm increases. The infestation of foxes in neighbouring France with intensive fox hunting is more than twice as high as in the Grand Duchy.

Although there has been an increase in the number of foxes with mange in recent times, this is not an argument for re-authorising hunting for the reasons mentioned above, among others. Especially as mange is not a problem for humans.
This faction of hunters, who are calling for a renewed hunt for foxes, would do better to intensify the hunt for the escalating populations of hoofed game (deer, wild boar, roe deer and illegally released species such as musk deer and fallow deer). The fact that epidemics are also rampant in these species (e.g. African swine fever, bluetongue and red deer tuberculosis) and that browsing is the real problem for the natural regeneration of forests does not yet seem to have been properly recognised in these circles. The argument that the fox poses a threat to biodiversity and especially to ground-nesting birds is ridiculous in view of the escalating wild boar population.

In previous times, the consistent hunting of the fox and gassing of the burrows could neither eradicate wild rabies nor the fox. Instead, they led to the destruction of natural population regulation and the almost complete eradication of the native badger.
The rabies vaccination campaign in the 1980s initially caused the fox population to rise, as this disease disappeared as a cause of death, but from the year 2000 the population stabilised again.
From a scientific point of view, the hunting ban has no negative consequences and should therefore be maintained.

Conclusion :
The hunting of foxes must be strictly rejected for scientific and animal welfare reasons!
The killing of foxes offers no ecological benefits, nor does it offer any other social benefit (e.g. use as food, fur). Hunting foxes is solely for the recreational enjoyment of a certain faction of hunters.
Decisions, such as those on fox hunting, should, as the past has shown us, be based exclusively on scientifically proven facts and not be the plaything of lobbying by certain circles!

19.02.2024