Classified as a nuisance species in many states and not native to the Americas, feral swine cause significant damage to our natural resources and negatively impact agricultural production. Recent research highlights the growing negative impacts feral swine can have to our water, plants, wildlife communities (both game and non-game) and their habitat. The prolific reproductive capabilities of feral swine create an enormous challenge for effectively managing this invasive, exotic species and mitigating their damage. Many states have implemented transportation bans for feral swine as well as other measures to curb the spread of these animals.
Feral swine cause significant damage to our natural resources. Researchers are beginning to uncover more and more of the negative impacts feral swine can have to our water, plants, wildlife communities (both game and non-game) and their habitat. Specifically, research has shown that, through competition for food and space as well as some predation, feral swine can displace deer and ground-nesting birds. Additionally, feral swine negatively impact the larger agriculture community, and can be devastating to individual agricultural producers due to their rooting behavior and consumption of valuable crops. Furthermore, they can serve as a vector for disease to game and non-game animals, livestock, and even humans. The prolific reproductive capabilities of feral swine create an enormous challenge for effectively managing this invasive, exotic species and mitigating their damage. State and federal agencies have struggled with cost-effective management techniques that impede the spread of these animals. State fish and wildlife agency regulatory approaches to the management of feral swine varies from liberal seasons to no take at all.
Not native to the Americas, feral swine were first brought over by early European explorers in the 1500s as livestock/domestic pigs. The importation of these animals later included Eurasian wild boar, which were introduced into parts of the United States for hunting purposes. Over the years, escaped or open-range domestic pigs and Eurasian wild boar interbred, helping establish feral swine populations in North America.
Today, due to the popularity of feral swine, many privately-owned fenced hunting preserves and hunting destinations feature hogs as pursuable quarry. This has had a large impact on the feral swine expansion rate, due to hogs escaping from these privately owned operations as well as to illegal translocation of feral swine to previously unoccupied areas in order to pursue them as game animals.
Points of Interest
- Feral swine are also known as wild pigs, wild hogs, wild boar, Russian wild boar, or Eurasian wild boar.
- In 1990 there were approximately 2 million feral swine in 20 states. In 2013 there were an estimated 6 million feral swine with sightings in 47 states and established populations in 38. More than 50%, and typically 70%, of an area’s feral swine must be killed each year to simply keep population numbers stable.
- In 2007 feral swine were responsible for a conservative estimate of approximately $1.5 billion dollars’ worth of crop damage in the United States.
- In 2014 USDA Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) was issued $20 million to the National Feral Swine Damage Management Program. The Program is dedicated to field operations, research, disease monitoring, outreach, regulation, and internal monitoring.
- A practice called whole sounder removal allows for a greater chance of capturing entire groups of hogs. A “sounder” is the terminology used for a family group of hogs and on average consist of two sows and their young, which can number between 4 and 12 piglets per sow.
- Poisoning feral swine with sodium nitrite or other toxicants is being explored by researchers and has shown promise as a cost-effective form of removal.
- Strict regulations with clear enforcement authority over feral swine transport can help reduce the spread to new areas or repopulating depleted areas.
- MISS. CODE ANN §49-7-140(2) states, no person may transport or relocate within the state any live feral hog, wild swine or Russian Boar and release the hog into the wild. Wild hogs may not be caught or trapped and released into the wild at a location different from the location where the wild hog was caught or trapped. A violation of this section, upon conviction, is punishable as a Class I violation. MISS. CODE ANN. §49-7-141 states, any person who has been convicted of a Class I violation shall be fined not less than Two Thousand Dollars ($ 2,000.00) nor more than Five Thousand Dollars ($ 5,000.00) and shall be imprisoned in the county jail for five (5) days. The person shall also forfeit all hunting, trapping and fishing privileges for a period of not less than twelve (12) consecutive months from the date of conviction.
- Act 1104 of the Arkansas General Assembly prohibits the possession, sale and transport of any hogs not conspicuously identified by ear tag provided by the Arkansas Livestock and Poultry Commission.
- In 2011, Tennessee removed “feral swine” from defined big game species, and in order to remove the incentive to relocate wild hogs, they are now considered a destructive species to be controlled by methods other than sport hunting. It is illegal to possess, transport, or release live wild hogs (“wild appearing”) as defined.
Current management methods haven’t properly addressed the feral swine explosion that has been seen throughout the country. It is imperative that coordination and best management techniques be utilized to address this serious conservation challenge. Ideally, a strong multi-collaborative strategy involving states, federal agencies, non-governmental organizations, and local stakeholders could be implemented to assess current management techniques, share best practices, and execute a multi-pronged approach to managing feral swine. Foremost, states need to work collectively with partners to slow the spread of feral pigs by implementing and enforcing a transportation ban of some type.
For more information regarding this issue please contact:
Bee Frederick at Bee@sportsmenslink.org
Share this page
Your opinion counts
For the 80th Anniversary of the American System of Conservation Funding, in which way are you willing to increase your contribution to the future of America’s fish and wildlife conservation?Vote Here
- Supporting increased federal or state excise taxes on sporting goods (28.17%)
- Supporting increases in the costs of hunting and fishing licenses (16.90%)
- Purchasing additional shooting, hunting, or fishing equipment (11.27%)
- Purchasing conservation oriented license plates (5.63%)
- Purchasing either species-specific or general habitat stamps (8.45%)
- Introducing additional participants to recreational shooting, hunting, and/or fishing (29.58%)