Cantonal popular initiative: Canton of Obwalden

«For professional wildlife protection»

Constitutional initiative in the form of a drafted proposal

Based on Articles 61 and 62 of the Cantonal Constitution of Obwalden of 19 May 1968 and on the Voting Act

Submitted by the initiative committee [date of submission]

Text of the initiative

The undersigned persons, eligible to vote in the Canton of Obwalden, submit the following constitutional initiative:

The Cantonal Constitution of Obwalden of 19 May 1968 is supplemented by the following article:

Art. [new] Professional wildlife protection

1 The exercise of hunting by private individuals (licence hunting, recreational hunting) is prohibited throughout the entire territory of the Canton of Obwalden.

2 The protection, care and, where necessary, regulation of wild animals shall be the exclusive responsibility of professionally trained wildlife managers employed by the canton.

3 The killing of wild animals is only permitted as a last resort, when all other suitable measures for preventing damage or averting danger have been exhausted or are insufficient. It requires prior approval by the Wildlife Commission.

4 The canton shall establish an independent Wildlife Commission, composed of representatives of animal welfare and nature conservation organisations, the scientific community and the authorities concerned. The commission shall oversee wildlife management and decide on regulatory measures.

5 The canton shall promote the natural regulation of wildlife populations, the connectivity of habitats and the coexistence of humans and wild animals.

6 Further details shall be regulated by law.

Art. [new] Protection of endangered and protected wild animal species

1 The canton refrains from regulating populations of protected wild animal species pursuant to Art. 7a of the Federal Act on Hunting and the Protection of Wild Mammals and Birds and does not grant kill permits for individual animals of protected species pursuant to Art. 12 para. 2 of this Act, in particular not for wolf, lynx, bear, beaver, otter, golden jackal, golden eagle, goosander and other species protected under federal law. Paragraph 3 remains reserved.

2 It relies on fostering coexistence between humans and wild animals, passive damage prevention, the ecological enhancement of habitats and the scientific monitoring of wild animal presence.

3 Measures against individual wild animals that pose an immediate and significant danger to humans remain reserved. They are to be limited to the minimum necessary and carried out by the canton's competent specialist authority.

4 The canton actively advocates for the protection and preservation of endangered wild animal species within the framework of inter-cantonal cooperation and towards the Confederation.

Transitional provision

1 The cantonal government shall issue the necessary implementing provisions within two years of the adoption of this constitutional amendment.

2 Existing hunting licences expire upon the entry into force of the implementing provisions. Patent fees already paid for the current hunting season will be reimbursed on a pro-rata basis.

3 The cantonal government shall ensure continuity of wildlife management during the transitional phase.

Explanatory notes

1. Starting position

In the Canton of Obwalden, a small canton of Central Switzerland with around 38,000 inhabitants across an area of 491 km², today's recreational hunting is a system that serves neither species conservation nor modern wildlife management. It is the exercise of a bloody leisure pursuit at the expense of sentient beings, legitimised by outdated narratives that do not withstand scientific scrutiny. The claim that the ecological balance would collapse without recreational hunting has been empirically disproven for over 50 years by the Geneva model (see the comprehensive dossier on the Geneva hunting ban on wildbeimwild.com).

Recreational hunting in Obwalden is organised as licence hunting. Private individuals purchase a cantonal licence and hunt without fixed responsibility for a specific hunting ground. Contrary to the widespread claim, licence holders do not assume any ecological responsibility, but instead act within the framework of cantonal kill quotas (see the Psychology of recreational hunting in the canton of Obwalden as well as the critical analysis of hunting training on wildbeimwild.com).

At the same time, an increasing number of protected wild animal species are coming under pressure at the federal level. The revision of the Hunting Act in December 2022 introduced preventive regulation of the wolf. Since February 2025, cantons have been permitted to authorise the killing of individual beavers that cause significant damage (Art. 9d JSV). The Canton of Obwalden is affected by the return of the wolf: the wolf at Pilatus made national headlines in 2023/2024. The lynx is native to the canton. The golden eagle breeds in the Obwalden Alps. The Engelberg Valley and the northern side of Pilatus are habitats of supraregional ecological significance (see the analysis of hunting policy on wildbeimwild.com and the wolf policy on wildbeimwild.com).

The canton of Obwalden has the opportunity to set a clear example here: not only for professional wildlife protection instead of recreational hunting, but also for the consistent protection of endangered wild animal species at the cantonal level.

2. The role model: canton of Geneva

On 19 May 1974, a good 70 percent of voters in the canton of Geneva voted to abolish militia-style recreational hunting. Before the ban, big game in the canton had been practically wiped out: red deer and wild boars had been absent for decades, and only a few dozen roe deer remained. Over 400 recreational hunters released large numbers of pheasants, grey partridges and hares for recreational hunting.

The experience since the recreational hunting ban has been unequivocal:

Biodiversity has increased markedly. The number of overwintering waterfowl has multiplied from a few hundred to around 30,000. Geneva is now home to the largest brown hare population and one of the last grey partridge populations in Switzerland.
The roe deer population has settled at a healthy level, with an annual special cull by professional game wardens of just 20 to 36 animals.
The ban has been in force continuously for over 50 years. Geneva has never repealed it.
The total cost of professional wildlife management in Geneva amounts to around 1.2 million francs annually, split into approximately 600,000 francs for personnel (around three full-time positions, shared among roughly a dozen environmental officers), 250,000 francs for prevention, and 350,000 francs for damage compensation. This corresponds to around 2.40 francs per resident per year.

The long-serving Geneva fauna inspector Gottlieb Dandliker (2001 to 2025) described the recreational hunting ban as the most financially favourable alternative for the canton. A detailed account can be found in the dossier «Geneva and the hunting ban» on wildbeimwild.com. The efficiency of the Geneva model is evident in a direct comparison: a professional game warden in Geneva needs on average 8 hours and a maximum of 2 cartridges for a sanitary kill of a wild boar. A recreational hunter in the canton of Zurich needs 60 to 80 hours and up to 15 cartridges for the same task. The density of brown hares in Geneva is 17.7 animals per 100 hectares (the highest in Switzerland), whereas in the canton of Zurich it is only 1.0 per 100 hectares (cf. fact check by the Zurich Cantonal Council).

3. The concept: professional wildlife wardens instead of recreational hunting

The initiative does not replace recreational hunting with a vacuum, but with professional wildlife management based on the game warden model. This model is founded on the following principles:

Professional expertise instead of leisure pursuit. Professional wildlife managers act on a scientific basis (cf. the critical analysis of hunting training on wildbeimwild.com).

Last-resort principle. A kill is only permissible once all non-lethal measures have been exhausted.

Democratic oversight through a wildlife commission. The independent commission prevents political pressure from diluting wildlife management.

Natural self-regulation as a guiding principle. Experience from Geneva, from national parks and from numerous scientific Studies confirms that, in most cases, wildlife populations regulate themselves.

4. Why Obwalden?

The canton of Obwalden is suited for the introduction of professional wildlife protection for several reasons:

Wolf at Pilatus. The wolf on the Pilatus made national headlines in 2023/2024 and polarised the debate across Central Switzerland. The Pilatus lies on the border between Obwalden, Lucerne and Nidwalden. The initiative offers a constitutional answer: professional wildlife management instead of politically motivated kills (see the wolf policy on wildbeimwild.com).

Engelberg Valley: a unique habitat. The Engelberg Valley is one of the most scenically impressive valleys in Central Switzerland and a habitat for ibex, chamois, golden eagle and lynx. Professional wildlife management would protect this unique habitat more consistently than recreational hunting (see wildbeimwild.com on national parks and protected areas).

Protective forest on the Brünig and in the Obwalden Alps. Obwalden has a high proportion of protective forest. The wolf naturally regulates the roe deer population and reduces browsing pressure on protective forests, which is significant both ecologically and economically.

500 signatures. With 38,000 inhabitants, 500 signatures represent around 2.6 percent of the population. Signatures can be collected in Sarnen, Kerns, Alpnach, Sachseln and Engelberg.

Tourism canton. Engelberg and the Pilatus are tourist destinations of national importance. Professional wildlife protection and coexistence with predators are an argument for sustainable tourism.

Licence hunting = a simple change of system. No lease agreements, no compensation for municipalities. Existing licences lapse, and fees already paid are reimbursed on a pro-rata basis.

Size comparison with Geneva. At 491 km², Obwalden is nearly twice the size of Geneva (282 km²). The differences lie in topography (alpine vs. flat) and population (38,000 vs. 500,000). However, sparser settlement means fewer conflict zones.

5. On the text of the initiative

Paragraph 1: Ban on recreational hunting

The ban on licence hunting by private individuals corresponds to the Geneva model. Cantonal competence is undisputed: Art. 3 para. 1 and 2 of the hunting act. The three hunting systems are of equal standing. Geneva has been compliant with federal law since 1974.

Paragraph 2: Professional wildlife management

Instead of recreational hunters, professionally trained wildlife managers in cantonal service take on all tasks. In Geneva, this system has proven its worth for over 50 years.

Paragraph 3: Kill as a last resort

A kill is the exception, not the rule. Passive measures take priority.

Paragraph 4: Wildlife commission

The independent wildlife commission is modelled on the Geneva system. It prevents the cantonal government from independently approving exceptions (see Hunting myths fact-checked).

Paragraph 5: Natural regulation and coexistence

Promoting coexistence in Obwalden includes, in particular, protecting the Engelberg valley, safeguarding the protective forest, and raising awareness among the population and tourists.

Transitional provisions

The two-year deadline gives the cantonal government sufficient time. The existing Office for Forest and Landscape can serve as the institutional basis.

6. On the second article: protection of endangered and protected wild animal species

The second article is particularly relevant for Obwalden. The wolf at Pilatus has shown how quickly political pressure can lead to calls for kills. The lynx is native to the canton. The golden eagle breeds in the Obwalden Alps. The “in particular” wording also protects future returning species, especially the bear (see the wolf policy on wildbeimwild.com).

7. Cost implications: a concrete budget for Obwalden

The Geneva reference budget

In Geneva, total costs amount to around 1.2 million francs annually: around 600,000 francs for personnel, around 250,000 francs for prevention, and around 350,000 francs for damage compensation.

Conservative projection for Obwalden

For Obwalden, with an area of 491 km² and around 38,000 residents, the following deliberately conservative cost estimate applies:

Personnel costs: CHF 360,000 to 560,000 annually. Between 3 and 4 full-time positions are required. Obwalden is nearly twice the size of Geneva and topographically demanding: the Engelberg valley, the northern slopes of Pilatus, and extensive alpine farming.

Material costs: CHF 70,000 to 120,000 annually.

Damage compensation: CHF 40,000 to 90,000 annually.

Herd protection start-up investment: 300’000 to 500’000 francs. A one-off investment in herd protection infrastructure for the Engelberg valley and the Pilatus region over three to five years.

Total costs: CHF 470,000 to 770,000 annually (gross).

Savings and counter-financing

These are offset by savings: no hunting examinations, no licence administration, no kill-quota planning, no hunting oversight. A single wolf killed senselessly costs the public around CHF 35,000. Compensatory reproduction (the artificially increased reproduction rate caused by hunting pressure) subsides within a few years of the system change.

Lost revenue

Abolishing recreational hunting would eliminate licence fees of an estimated 200,000 to 350,000 francs annually. However, this is offset by the never-calculated external costs of militia hunting (wildlife accidents, hunting-related browsing damage in the protective forest, administrative expenses, police and court interventions), which amount to a multiple of these revenues. In the canton of Geneva, these revenues have been forgone since 1974 without any financial problems: before the hunting ban, more than 400 recreational hunters were active; today, three full-time positions do the same work better. Sanitary and therapeutic kills carried out by professional game wardens are not the same as regulatory hunting based on hunters' lore or a misunderstood "experience of nature" on the part of recreational hunters. A full cost accounting shows that militia hunting costs taxpayers significantly more than it brings in (cf. «What recreational hunting really costs Switzerland» on wildbeimwild.com).

Recreational hunters in politics vote against nature conservation. The recreational hunting lobby systematically opposes biodiversity and species protection concerns. In 2024, it fought against the Biodiversity Initiative (63 per cent No). In 2020, the hunting act it had helped shape failed at the ballot box (51.9 per cent No). In 2016, the Ticino hunting association torpedoed the Parc Adula national park. During the 2015–2019 legislative period, recreational hunters in parliament voted predominantly against environmental concerns. Anyone who claims that recreational hunters are nature conservationists is ignoring their voting behaviour (cf. Ticino Hunting Association: 30 Years of Nonsense and Cost dossier).

The Net additional costs are likely to be in the range of CHF 250,000 to 500,000 annually. In absolute terms, the costs are modest: CHF 250,000 to 500,000 for a canton with a total budget of around CHF 390 million (2024 state accounts, FFA). That is less than 0.15 percent of the cantonal budget (see Hunting myths fact check on wildbeimwild.com).

8. Compatibility with superior law

First article: Abolition of recreational hunting

Compliant with federal law. Art. 3 para. 1 and 2 JSG. Three equivalent hunting systems. Unchallenged in Geneva since 1974.

Second article: Protection of protected species

Art. 7a JSG permits preventive regulation but does not require it. The same applies to kill authorisations for individual animals under Art. 12 para. 2 JSG. Refraining from this violates neither federal law nor the Bern Convention.

Unity of subject matter

Ensured, as all provisions relate to cantonal wildlife management and the protection of wild animals.

9. Anticipating foreseeable objections

“Obwalden is too small and too alpine”

The facts: Obwalden, at 491 km², is almost twice the size of Geneva (282 km²), but much more sparsely populated. This means fewer conflict zones. At 250,000 to 500,000 francs, the costs are absolutely modest. The Engelberg Valley and the Pilatus region deserve professional protection (cf. the Psychology of recreational hunting in the canton of Obwalden).

Short communicative formula: «Obwalden has 38,000 inhabitants, Geneva 500,000. More sparsely populated, fewer conflicts. 250,000 to 500,000 francs. Modest.»

“The wolf at Pilatus shows that we have to shoot it”

The facts: The wolf on the Pilatus shows the opposite: it shows how quickly political pressure leads to knee-jerk calls for a kill. Professional wildlife management would have monitored the wolf scientifically and protected livestock herds professionally. The wolf regulates the roe deer population and reduces browsing pressure on protective forests.

Short communicative formula: «The wolf at Pilatus needs professional management, not reflexive killings.»

“The costs are too high for a small canton”

The facts: Even generously calculated: 250,000 to 500,000 francs. 0.06 to 0.13 percent of the cantonal budget. A fraction of what the canton spends on road maintenance.

Short communicative formula: «250,000 to 500,000 francs. 0.06 to 0.13 percent of the cantonal budget. Modest.»

10. Summary

This initiative gives the population of Obwalden the opportunity to come out in favour of modern, evidence-based wildlife management and comprehensive protection for threatened wild animal species. The first article follows the Geneva model, which has proven itself for over 50 years. The second article specifically protects the wolf on the Pilatus, the lynx in the Engelberg Valley and the golden eagle in the Obwalden Alps. Its manageable size, sparse population and modest absolute costs make Obwalden a suitable canton for this change of system.

Initiative committee “For professional wildlife protection”

[Name 1], [Name 2], [Name 3] …

(Committee members in accordance with cantonal law, resident in the canton of Obwalden)

Contact address: [Committee address]

Appendix: Further documentation

The Geneva model in detail: wildbeimwild.com/dossiers/genf-und-das-jagdverbot. Comprehensive overview of Geneva's wildlife management since 1974.

Scientific studies: wildbeimwild.com/studien. Collection of scientific studies on self-regulation.

Hunting in Switzerland: wildbeimwild.com/jagd-in-der-schweiz. Continuously updated overview.

Psychology of recreational hunting in the canton of Obwalden: wildbeimwild.com: Psychology of recreational hunting in the canton of OW

Psychology of recreational hunting: wildbeimwild.com/category/psychologie-jagd

National parks and protected areas: wildbeimwild.com/tag/schweizerischer-nationalpark

Wild animals in settlement areas: wildbeimwild.com/tag/stadtwildtiere

Hunting myths: wildbeimwild.com/dossiers/jagdmythen

Cantonal popular initiative Basel-Stadt: Template text of the initiative in the canton of Basel-Stadt

Note on the procedure

The initiative committee submits the text of the initiative to the State Chancellery of the canton of Obwalden for preliminary review before the signature-gathering process begins. 500 valid signatures are required for the initiative to come into effect. The submission procedures are governed by the Voting Act.

Strategic briefing for activists

Popular initiative "For Professional Wildlife Protection", Canton of Obwalden Internal working document, as of March 2026

Summary

Obwalden is the Pilatus canton of the series. The wolf at Pilatus in 2023/2024 polarised the debate across all of central Switzerland. The Engelberg valley is a unique habitat. 500 signatures out of 38,000 residents are achievable. The absolute costs, at 250,000 to 500,000 francs, are modest. The manageable area (491 km², almost twice the size of Geneva) makes the comparison with Geneva tangible.

1. Why Obwalden of all places?

Wolf at Pilatus. National headlines in 2023/2024. The species protection clause is the direct answer.

Engelberg valley. A unique habitat. Ibex, chamois, golden eagle, lynx.

500 signatures out of 38,000 residents. 2.6 per cent. Achievable.

Manageable area. 491 km² vs. 282 km² in Geneva. The comparison is tangible.

Licence hunting = a simple change of system. No lease agreements.

Modest absolute costs. 250,000 to 500,000 francs.

2. Lessons from Zurich: What we are doing differently

Positive title. “For professional wildlife protection”.

The wolf at Pilatus as a mobilisation topic. An emotional anchor.

Absolute costs instead of per capita. 250,000 to 500,000 francs are more convincing than per-capita figures.

3. Opponent analysis and prepared responses

Counter-argument 1: "Obwalden is too small and too alpine"

Short communicative formula: "Obwalden has 38,000 residents, Geneva 500,000. Less densely populated, fewer conflicts."

Counter-argument 2: "The wolf at Pilatus shows that we have to cull"

Short communicative formula: «The wolf at Pilatus needs professional management, not reflexive killings.»

Counter-argument 3: “The costs are too high”

Short communicative formula: «250,000 to 500,000 francs. 0.06 to 0.13 percent of the cantonal budget. Modest.»

4. Communication strategy: The three core messages

"The wolf at Pilatus needs professional management." An emotional anchor for Obwalden.

«Geneva has been demonstrating it for 50 years.» Never repealed since 1974.

«Professional instead of hobby.» Qualified professionals instead of recreational shooters.

5. Timetable and next steps

Phase	Content	Timeframe
Committee formation & preliminary text review	Bring in a lawyer; committee members resident in Obwalden	Month 1–3
Submission for preliminary review	Obwalden State Chancellery	Month 3–4
Publication & start of signature collection	Target: 650+ signatures as a buffer	Month 4
Party contacts & coalition building	SP, Greens; Pro Natura; BirdLife; Engelberg Tourism as a partner	Month 1–10
Submission of signatures	State Chancellery, official verification	After the collection period
Cantonal parliament debate	Parliamentary anchoring; media work	Following months
Voting campaign	The Pilatus wolf, Engelberg valley, absolute costs	Before the vote

6. Campaign material

Geneva dossier on wildbeimwild.com as the central set of arguments.
The Psychology of recreational hunting in the canton of Obwalden as background material.
Local media: Obwaldner Zeitung, Obwaldner Volksfreund, Tele 1.
Infographic: the wolf at Pilatus as a leitmotif. Engelberg valley. Size comparison OW vs. GE. Absolute costs.

7. Further sources

This document is a template text from IG Wild beim Wild. It may be freely used by activists, organisations or initiative committees and adapted to the circumstances in the Canton of Obwalden.

Fact check: The claims of the recreational hunting lobby

The brochure «Die Jagd in der Schweiz schützt und nützt» ("Hunting in Switzerland protects and benefits") published by JagdSchweiz reads like a promotional pamphlet, yet its central claims do not hold up to a fact check. Ten narratives put to the test, from «statutory duty» to «biodiversity» to «80% approval»: Dossier: Fact check on the JagdSchweiz brochure →