Cantonal popular initiative: Canton of Appenzell Outer Rhodes

«For professional wildlife protection»

Constitutional initiative in the form of a drafted proposal

Pursuant to Art. 51 et seq. of the Constitution of the Canton of Appenzell Outer Rhodes of 30 April 1995 and the legislation on political rights

Submitted by the initiative committee [date of submission]

Text of the initiative

The undersigned persons entitled to vote in the Canton of Appenzell Outer Rhodes hereby submit the following constitutional initiative:

The Constitution of the Canton of Appenzell Outer Rhodes of 30 April 1995 is supplemented with the following article:

Art. [new] Professional wildlife protection

1 The practice of hunting by private individuals (licence hunting, recreational hunting) is prohibited throughout the entire territory of the Canton of Appenzell Outer Rhodes.

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

The Canton of Appenzell Outer Rhodes covers 243 km² and has around 55,000 inhabitants. The hilly, pre-alpine region is characterised by scattered settlements, agriculture and a high proportion of forest. The canton is surrounded by the Canton of St. Gallen and borders Appenzell Inner Rhodes.

Recreational hunting in Appenzell Outer Rhodes is organised as licence hunting. Private individuals purchase a cantonal licence and hunt without fixed responsibility for a particular ground. The licence system creates no professional added value compared with professional wildlife management: it does not tie the recreational hunters to a specific area and makes coordinated wildlife management more difficult (cf. the Psychology of recreational hunting in the canton of Appenzell Outer Rhodes as well as the critical analysis of hunting training on wildbeimwild.com).

The claim that without recreational hunting the ecological balance would collapse has been empirically disproven by the Geneva model for over 50 years (cf. the comprehensive dossier on the Geneva hunting ban on wildbeimwild.com). At 243 km², Appenzell Outer Rhodes has a comparable area to Geneva (282 km²). If professional wildlife protection has been working on 282 km² for over 50 years, there is no reason why it should not work on 243 km².

At the same time, more and more protected wild animal species are coming under pressure at the federal level. Political pressure on species such as the lynx, beaver, otter and goosander is steadily increasing (see the analysis of hunting policy on wildbeimwild.com).

2. The role model: canton of Geneva

On 19 May 1974, a good 70 percent of those voting in the canton of Geneva voted in favour of abolishing militia-based recreational hunting. The experience since the ban on recreational hunting 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. Before the 1974 vote, the recreational hunting lobby had claimed that the brown hare would be wiped out by Predators without recreational hunting. The opposite has occurred.
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 lifted it. The total costs amount to around 1.2 million Swiss francs annually, or around 2.40 francs per inhabitant. 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).

A detailed account can be found in the dossier «Geneva and the hunting ban» on wildbeimwild.com.

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

The initiative replaces recreational hunting with professional wildlife management based on the game warden model:

Professional expertise instead of leisure pursuit. Professional wildlife managers act on a scientific basis, within the framework of a cantonal performance mandate.

Last-resort principle. A kill is only permitted once all non-lethal measures have been exhausted: electric fences, deterrence, habitat design, and structural protective measures.

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 Appenzell Outer Rhodes?

Appenzell Outer Rhodes is suited to this initiative for one overriding reason:

The lowest signature threshold of all cantons with ballot votes: 300 signatures. Only 300 valid signatures are required for a cantonal popular initiative in Appenzell Outer Rhodes. Only in the Landsgemeinde cantons of Glarus and Appenzell Inner Rhodes, where a single person can submit a motion, is the hurdle lower. 300 signatures can be gathered in just a few collection days. Even a small committee of three to five people can reach this number within a few weeks. The practical attainability of this hurdle makes Appenzell Outer Rhodes the easiest entry canton for a popular initiative "For Professional Wildlife Protection".

Area comparable to Geneva. Appenzell Outer Rhodes covers 243 km², Geneva 282 km². The canton is even smaller than the Geneva reference model. Both cantons have a similar mix of settled areas, agriculture and forest.

Licence hunting = a simple change of system. As in Zug, no hunting lease agreements need to be dissolved and no municipalities need to be compensated. The licences expire once the implementing provisions come into force.

Signal effect from the Appenzell region. A success in Appenzell Outer Rhodes would be particularly remarkable precisely because the canton is considered rural and tradition-conscious. The signal would be: if even in the Appenzell region a majority votes for professional wildlife protection, then the Geneva model can be implemented anywhere.

Challenge: Rural character. Appenzell Outer Rhodes is not an urban canton. Agriculture and the associated hunting tradition carry a different weight than in Basel or Zug. The campaign must therefore focus more strongly on the concrete benefits of the Geneva model for agriculture: fewer wildlife damages through professional prevention, relief for farmers through state-provided electric fences and deterrence measures, elimination of the conflict of interest between recreational hunting and actual damage management (cf. wildbeimwild.com on wild animals in settlement areas).

5. On the text of the initiative

The initiative text corresponds to the licence hunting variant (as in Zug). The cantonal authority is undisputed: the federal hunting act (JSG) explicitly leaves the organisation of hunting operations to the cantons (Art. 3 para. 1 and 2 JSG). The three hunting systems (licence hunting, territorial hunting and administrative hunting) are equivalent. The canton of Geneva has practised administrative hunting in compliance with federal law since 1974. Existing hunting licences expire once the implementing provisions come into force, and licence fees are refunded on a pro-rata basis.

The second paragraph on the protection of protected species is relevant for Appenzell Outer Rhodes because the canton lies at the junction between the Central Plateau and the Pre-Alps. The lynx occurs in the adjoining St. Gallen forest areas. The wolf has returned to Eastern Switzerland, and packs already live in the canton of St. Gallen. The beaver is spreading along the waterways of Eastern Switzerland. A constitutional renunciation of preventive regulation protection would be a forward-looking signal (cf. the analysis of wolf policy on wildbeimwild.com).

6. Cost implications: Concrete budget for Appenzell Outer Rhodes

The Geneva reference budget

In Geneva, which at 282 km² is somewhat larger than Appenzell Outer Rhodes and has around 500,000 inhabitants, the total cost of professional wildlife management amounts to around 1.2 million francs annually.

Conservative projection for Appenzell Outer Rhodes

For Appenzell Outer Rhodes, with an area of 243 km² and around 55,000 inhabitants, the following deliberately conservative cost estimate applies. This takes into account the hilly to pre-alpine topography at the edge of the Alpstein:

Personnel costs: 240,000 to 420,000 francs annually. This requires 2 to 3 full-time positions. Appenzell Outer Rhodes is smaller than Geneva and lies at the edge of the Alpstein. The hilly to pre-alpine topography requires specialists with knowledge of the terrain.

Material costs: 50,000 to 90,000 francs annually.

Damage compensation: 25,000 to 60,000 francs annually.

Initial herd protection investment: 200,000 to 350,000 francs. One-off investment over three to five years for the peripheral Alpstein areas: livestock guardian dog programmes, mobile fencing, night-time enclosures.

Total costs: 315,000 to 570,000 francs annually (gross, excluding the one-off herd protection start-up investment). This corresponds to around 5.70 to 10.35 francs per inhabitant per year.

Savings and counter-financing

Against this stand savings: no hunting examinations, no licence administration, no kill quota planning, no hunting supervision. In addition, there are the costs for wolf kills (helicopter deployments, coordination, legal proceedings). Compensatory reproduction (the reproduction rate artificially increased by hunting pressure) subsides within a few years after the change of system.

Lost revenue

With the abolition of recreational hunting, the licence fees of an estimated 120,000 to 200,000 francs annually will be lost. However, this is offset by the never-accounted-for external costs of militia hunting (wildlife-vehicle collisions, hunting-related browsing damage in protective forests, administrative expenses, police and court interventions), which are likely to significantly exceed these revenues. In the canton of Geneva, these revenues have been forgone since 1974, without financial problems: before the hunting ban, over 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: militia hunting costs the taxpayer 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 amount to between 150,000 and 350,000 francs annually, which corresponds to around2.75 to 6.35 francs per resident corresponds to. In absolute terms, this is modest: 150,000 to 350,000 francs for a canton with an annual total expenditure of several hundred million francs (cf. Hunting myths fact check on wildbeimwild.com).

7. Compatibility with superordinate law

The initiative complies with federal law. The same legal argumentation as for all previous cantonal proposals applies: Art. 3 para. 1 and 2 JSG, the three equivalent hunting systems, over 50 years of unchallenged practice in Geneva. Art. 7a JSG enables cantons to carry out preventive regulation, but does not oblige them to do so. The same applies to kill permits for individual animals under Art. 12 para. 2 JSG. The initiative preserves the unity of subject matter.

8. Anticipating foreseeable objections

«Appenzell is a rural canton, the Geneva model doesn't fit here»

The facts: Geneva also has significant agricultural areas, vineyards and forest, and at 282 km² is even larger than Appenzell Outer Rhodes (243 km²). Professional wildlife management has been working there for over 50 years, including in rural municipalities. The objection that Geneva is "a city canton" ignores the reality of Geneva's hinterland.

Short communicative formula: «Geneva has vineyards, fields and forest across 282 km². Appenzell has hills, pastures and forest across 243 km². Geneva has been demonstrating how it's done for 50 years.»

«The per capita costs are too high»

The facts: The higher per-capita costs are a mathematical consequence of the small population, not a sign of inefficiency. In absolute figures, professional wildlife management in Appenzell Outer Rhodes costs roughly a quarter to just under half of Geneva's budget. And Geneva proves that these costs are an investment that pays off many times over through higher biodiversity, fewer wildlife damages and more professional management (cf. Hunting myths fact check on wildbeimwild.com).

Short communicative formula: «A net of around 3 to 6 francs per person per year. For professional wildlife protection instead of recreational hunting.»

«300 signatures are too few for such a far-reaching initiative»

The facts: The signature threshold of 300 is enshrined in the cantonal constitution. It applies to every popular initiative, regardless of its scope. Democratic legitimacy does not arise from collecting signatures, but from the vote, in which all eligible voters have a say. 300 signatures are the hurdle required for an issue to be put to a vote. The vote itself decides.

Short communicative formula: «300 signatures open the door to a vote. The people decide there.»

9. Summary

This initiative gives the population of Appenzell Outer Rhodes the opportunity to vote in favour of modern, evidence-based wildlife management. With just 300 signatures, the path to a vote is shorter than in any other canton with ballot-box voting. The area is smaller than that of Geneva, and the proven Geneva model shows that professional wildlife protection also works in a mixed landscape of farmland and forest.

Initiative committee “For professional wildlife protection”

[Name 1], [Name 2], [Name 3] …

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

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-ueber-die-auswirkung-der-jagd-auf-wildtiere-und-jaeger. Collection of scientific studies on the self-regulation of wildlife populations.

Hunting in Switzerland: wildbeimwild.com/warum-die-hobby-jagd-in-der-schweiz-kein-naturschutz-ist. Continuously updated overview of Swiss hunting policy.

Psychology of recreational hunting in the canton of Appenzell Outer Rhodes: wildbeimwild.com: Psychology of recreational hunting in the canton of AR. Motives, justifications and social dynamics.

Psychology of recreational hunting: wildbeimwild.com/category/psychologie-jagd. Analyses of motives, justifications and social dynamics of recreational hunting.

Wolf dossier: wildbeimwild.com/dossiers/wolf-in-der-schweiz-fakten-politik-und-die-grenzen-der-jagd. Current developments in wolf policy in Switzerland.

Wild animals and predators: wildbeimwild.com/category/wildtiere. Information on wild animals, predators and the coexistence of humans and wild animals.

Hunting myths: wildbeimwild.com/dossiers/jagdmythen. Fact check on the most common claims made by the recreational hunting lobby.

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 Cantonal Chancellery of Appenzell Outer Rhodes for preliminary review before the collection of signatures begins. 300 valid signatures are required for the initiative to come into effect. Currently, the canton of Appenzell Outer Rhodes does not set a time limit for collecting signatures. On 1 January 2027, the new cantonal constitution of 30 November 2025 will come into force: the threshold remains at 300 signatures, but a new six-month collection period from the date of official publication will apply (Art. 75 KV AR 2025). Submission procedures are governed by the cantonal legislation on political rights.

Strategic briefing for activists

Popular initiative «For Professional Wildlife Protection», Canton of Appenzell Outer Rhodes Internal working document, as of March 2026

Summary

With only 300 signatures required, Appenzell Outer Rhodes offers the lowest hurdle of all cantons with a ballot vote. At 243 km², the canton is smaller than Geneva. The biggest challenge is the canton's rural character, which calls for a different campaign strategy than in urban cantons. The strongest argument: if the initiative is put to a vote in Appenzell and succeeds there, the Geneva model can be implemented anywhere.

1. Why Appenzell Outer Rhodes?

300 signatures. The lowest hurdle of all cantons with a ballot vote. With good organisation, over 50 signatures can be collected on a single Saturday at the weekly market in Herisau. After six Saturdays, the initiative would be ready for submission. No other canton offers such low-threshold access to direct democracy.

243 km²: smaller than Geneva. This comparison of area invalidates any “not comparable” argument.

Licence hunting = a simple change of system. No lease agreements, no compensation for municipalities.

A signal effect from a rural region. A success in Appenzell would be the strongest possible signal: if it works here, it works everywhere.

2. The particular challenge: a rural canton

Unlike Basel or Zug, Appenzell Outer Rhodes is not an urban canton. The campaign must therefore be run differently:

Closeness to agriculture as an argument for the initiative. Professional wildlife managers are better partners for farmers than recreational hunters. The canton provides electric fences and deterrent devices, professional specialists respond more quickly and competently to wildlife damage, and the conflict of interest inherent in recreational hunting (keeping populations of huntable species high = more wildlife damage) is eliminated.

A factual tone. In a small canton where many people know each other, the campaign must remain factual. Personal attacks on recreational hunters would be counterproductive. The message must be: this is not against individuals, but for a better system (cf. the Psychology of recreational hunting in the canton of Appenzell Outer Rhodes).

Emphasise Geneva as a rural role model. Most people associate Geneva with the city. In fact, Geneva has an extensive rural hinterland with agriculture. This aspect must be communicated strongly in Appenzell.

3. Communication strategy: the three core messages

«300 signatures. That is all it takes to vote on professional wildlife protection.»

«Smaller than Geneva. What has worked there for 50 years will work here all the more.»

«Professional instead of hobby. Specialists who work for farmers, not for their own pleasure.»

4. Opponent analysis

The licence holders form a small group. In a canton with 55'000 inhabitants, every recreational hunter is personally known. The campaign must respect this fact and remain factual.

The farmers' association could appear as an ally or as an opponent. The answer: professional wildlife management is better for farmers than recreational hunting, because the conflict of interest disappears and damage prevention is carried out more professionally.

The tradition argument will carry more weight in Appenzell than in Basel or Zug. The answer: in 1974, Geneva also voted against tradition. And Geneva has never repealed the ban since.

5. Timeline

Phase	Content	Timeframe
Committee formation & preliminary text review	Consult a lawyer; recruit committee members resident in Appenzell Outer Rhodes	Month 1–3
Submission for preliminary review	Cantonal Chancellery of Appenzell Outer Rhodes	Month 3–4
Signature collection	300 signatures; realistically achievable within a few weeks	Month 4–6
Party contacts & coalition building	Contacts with parties and conservation associations; sound out the farmers' association	Month 1–10
Cantonal parliament debate	Parliamentary anchoring; media work	Month 8–14
Voting campaign	Final mobilisation, infographics, media presence	Month 14–20

6. Campaign material

Geneva dossier on wildbeimwild.com as the central set of arguments.
The Psychology of recreational hunting in the canton of Appenzell Outer Rhodes as background material.
Infographic: area comparison AR/GE (243 vs. 282 km²) and «300 signatures» as the central figure.
Local media: Appenzeller Zeitung, Appenzeller Volksfreund, Radio FM1, TVO.
Agriculture fact sheet: concrete benefits of professional wildlife management for farmers.

7. Further sources

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

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) by JagdSchweiz reads like an advertising flyer, yet its central claims do not withstand a fact check. Ten narratives put to the test, ranging from “state task” and “species diversity” to “80% approval”: Dossier: Fact check on the JagdSchweiz brochure →