Cantonal Popular Initiative: Canton of Zurich

«For professional wildlife protection»

Constitutional initiative in the form of a drafted proposal

Pursuant to Art. 23 et seq. of the Constitution of the Canton of Zurich of 27 February 2005 and the Act on Political Rights (GPR)

Submitted by the initiative committee [date of submission]

Text of the initiative

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

The Constitution of the Canton of Zurich of 27 February 2005 is supplemented by the following article:

Art. [new] Professional wildlife protection

1 The exercise of hunting by private individuals (territorial hunting, recreational hunting) is prohibited throughout the entire territory of the Canton of Zurich. Existing hunting lease agreements will not be renewed.

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 The canton shall provide appropriate compensation to affected municipalities for the loss of hunting lease revenue during a five-year transitional period.

7 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 lease agreements shall expire no later than five years after the implementing legislation enters into force. Municipalities that lose hunting lease revenue will be appropriately compensated during the transitional period.

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

Explanatory notes

1. Starting position

In the Canton of Zurich, Switzerland's most populous canton with around 1.6 million inhabitants across an area of 1,729 km², today's recreational hunting is a system that serves neither species conservation nor a contemporary approach to wildlife management. It is the pursuit of a bloody leisure pastime at the expense of sentient beings, legitimised by outdated narratives that cannot 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).

Zurich is a canton with territorial hunting. Hunting grounds are leased by the political municipalities to private hunting associations. The leaseholders pay a lease fee and hunt at their own expense as a leisure activity. In 2018, the initiative "Wildlife Wardens Instead of Hunters" was rejected in the Canton of Zurich with 84 percent voting no. This result was not proof that the cause was wrong. It was proof that the strategy was wrong. The present initiative draws the lessons from 2018 and does everything differently: a positive title, a concrete budget calculation, a species-conservation clause to broaden the coalition, and early party support (see the Psychology of hunting in the Canton of Zurich as well as the hunters dossier on wildbeimwild.com).

At the same time, more and more protected wild animal species are coming under pressure at federal level. The revision of the hunting act in December 2022 introduced preventive regulation of the wolf. Since February 2025, cantons have been able to approve the kill of individual beavers that cause significant damage (Art. 9d JSV). Political pressure on other species such as the lynx, otter and goosander is steadily increasing. In the canton of Zurich, the beaver (along the Limmat, Sihl, Glatt and their tributaries), the lynx (in the Albis region and the Zurich Oberland) and numerous protected bird species have been documented (see the analysis of recreational hunting in Switzerland and the wolf dossier on wildbeimwild.com).

The canton of Zurich has the opportunity to send a clear signal here: not only in favour of professional wildlife protection instead of recreational hunting, but also for the consistent protection of threatened wild animal species at 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 kill by professional game wardens of only 20 to 36 animals. The population moves within a density that is sustainable for the forest area.
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 becomes clear 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, with biological training and within the framework of a cantonal service mandate. Their goal is to maintain healthy wildlife populations, not to maximise kill numbers (see the hunters dossier on wildbeimwild.com).

Last-resort principle. A kill is only permissible once all non-lethal measures have been exhausted. These include electric fences, deterrence, habitat management, relocation, taste repellents and structural protective measures.

Democratic oversight through a wildlife commission. The independent commission prevents political pressure from diluting wildlife management. The initiative enshrines the approval requirement at the constitutional level.

Natural self-regulation as a guiding principle. Experience from Geneva, from protected areas and from numerous scientific Studies has proven: wildlife populations regulate themselves in most cases. Recreational hunting disrupts this natural process by destroying social structures, artificially increasing reproduction rates and altering migratory movements.

4. Why Zurich, and why now?

Despite the failure of 2018, Zurich is well suited for a fresh attempt, because the conditions have changed fundamentally:

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).

Lowest per-capita costs in the series. With 1.6 million inhabitants, Zurich has the largest population of all cantons. Gross costs amount to between 0.60 and 0.85 francs per inhabitant per year, net costs between 0.25 and 0.45 francs. That is a third to a tenth of the Geneva level (2.40 francs), rendering the cost argument that proved fatal in 2018 ineffective. The alleged additional costs of 20 million francs claimed by the Zurich government in 2018 were never substantiated. The Zurich hunting administration failed to provide an explanatory answer to enquiries made under the public information act. The concretely calculated figures are now available.

Changed political environment. In 2018, the second paragraph on species protection did not exist. Today, the threat to protected species posed by federal policy is a reality: the wolf is subject to preventive regulation, individual beavers may be killed with cantonal approval since February 2025, and the goosander is under pressure. This mobilises nature conservation associations that stood on the sidelines in 2018.

New title, new strategy.«Game wardens instead of hunters» was a confrontational title that defined itself through its opponent. «For professional wildlife protection» is positively formulated and forces opponents to position themselves against «professional wildlife protection», which is communicatively difficult.

The most populous canton.A success in Zurich would have the greatest signal effect of all cantons. Zurich is the canton that most strongly influences the national debate.

6,000 signatures in 6 months.The hurdle is absolutely high, but proportionally low given 1.6 million inhabitants (0.4 per cent). Signatures can be collected efficiently in Zurich, Winterthur, Uster, Dübendorf, Dietikon and Wetzikon (cf. wildbeimwild.com on wild animals).

Beavers on the Limmat, Sihl and Glatt.The beaver is documented at several bodies of water in Zurich. The initiative protects the beaver in the canton (cf. wildbeimwild.com on wild animals and predators).

Lynx on the Albis and in the Oberland.The lynx is documented in the Zurich Oberland and on the Albis. Professional wildlife management protects the lynx and makes use of its ecological function as a natural regulator of the roe deer population.

5. On the first paragraph: professional wildlife protection

Paragraph 1: Ban on recreational hunting and expiry of lease agreements

The ban on territorial hunting by private individuals is at the core of the initiative. It corresponds to the Geneva model. The cantonal competence for this 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 in Switzerland (licence hunting, territorial hunting and state or administrative hunting) are equivalent. The canton of Geneva has practised administrative hunting in compliance with federal law since 1974. The addition «Existing hunting lease agreements will not be renewed» ensures that the system change proceeds in an orderly manner and that existing contractual obligations are respected.

Paragraph 2: Professional wildlife management

Instead of recreational hunters, professionally trained wildlife managers employed by the canton take on all tasks. In Geneva, this system has proven successful for over 50 years. The long-serving Geneva fauna inspector Gottlieb Dandliker pointed out that organising a licence hunt would require at least two full-time positions, whereas wild boar regulation in Geneva requires around one full-time position.

Paragraph 3: Kill as a last resort

A kill is not the rule, but the exception. Passive measures take priority. In Geneva, around 250 wild boars are killed annually by game wardens (according to FOEN hunting statistics), mainly young animals, with lead animals explicitly spared.

Paragraph 4: Wildlife commission

The independent wildlife commission is modelled on the Geneva model. It ensures that animal welfare and nature conservation organisations have a right of consultation and prevents the government from independently approving exceptions. The involvement of science guarantees evidence-based decisions (see the Hunting Ban Switzerland dossier on wildbeimwild.com).

Paragraph 5: Natural regulation and coexistence

In Zurich, promoting coexistence includes in particular the safeguarding and networking of wildlife corridors (Limmat, Sihl, Glatt), the ecological upgrading of green spaces within settlement areas, and educating the population on how to behave towards wild animals (see wildbeimwild.com on wild animals).

Paragraph 6: Compensation for municipalities

Specific to territorial hunting cantons. Zurich's municipalities receive lease revenues, which are compensated for over a period of five years. The lease revenues per municipality are marginal in relation to municipal budgets.

Transitional provisions

Two years for implementing legislation, five-year sunset clause for lease agreements. The existing Office for Landscape and Nature (ALN) with its fisheries and hunting administration can serve as an institutional basis.

6. On the second paragraph: Protection of endangered and protected wildlife species

The second paragraph is the central strategic innovation compared to 2018. It did not exist back then. Today it mobilises a broader coalition: not only animal welfare organisations, but also nature conservation organisations, BirdLife, Pro Natura, WWF and beaver groups are addressed by the species protection paragraph. The beaver is documented along the Limmat, Sihl and Glatt. The lynx is present in the Zurich Oberland and at the Albis. The phrase "in particular" is designed as a dynamic reference to federal law and also protects future returnees (see the wolf dossier on wildbeimwild.com).

7. Cost implications: Concrete budget for Zurich

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.

Projection for Zurich

For Zurich, with an area of 1,729 km² and around 1.6 million inhabitants:

Personnel costs: CHF 720,000 to 980,000 annually. 6 to 7 full-time positions are required. Zurich is around six times larger than Geneva, but is predominantly lowland and densely populated. The number of conflict zones per unit area is higher than in sparsely populated cantons, but the infrastructure is better.

Material costs: CHF 140,000 to 200,000 annually.

Damage compensation: CHF 100,000 to 200,000 annually.

Total costs: CHF 960,000 to 1,380,000 annually (gross). This corresponds to around CHF 0.60 to 0.85 per inhabitant per year.

Savings

This is offset by significant savings: no more hunting lease agreements to administer, no hunting examinations, no kill quota planning, no hunting supervision. The net additional costs are likely to be between 400,000 and 700,000 francs annually, which corresponds to around0.25 to 0.45 francs per resident, which corresponds to the lowest per-capita costs of all the cantons in the series: a fifth to a tenth of the Geneva level.

Lost revenue

With the abolition of recreational hunting, the lease income from territorial hunting, estimated at 800,000 to 1,200,000 francs annually, would be lost. However, this is offset by the externalised costs of militia hunting that have never been accounted for (wildlife accidents, hunting-related browsing damage in protective forests, administrative expenses, police and court interventions), which are likely to significantly exceed this income. In the canton of Geneva, this income has been foregone 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 job better. Sanitary and therapeutic kills carried out by professional game wardens are not the same as regulatory hunting based on hunters' tall tales or a misguided understanding of “nature experience” among recreational hunters. A full-cost analysis shows that militia hunting costs the taxpayer considerably more than it brings in (see «What recreational hunting really costs Switzerland» on wildbeimwild.com).

The alleged 20 million francs in additional costs claimed by the Zurich government in 2018 were never substantiated. The Zurich hunting administration failed to provide an explanatory response to requests made under the Public Information Act. The concretely calculated figures are now available (see Fact check: Zurich cantonal government, on wildbeimwild.com).

8. On the initiative process in the canton of Zurich

In the canton of Zurich, a popular initiative at the constitutional level requires the collection of 6,000 signatures within 6 months of the completion of the preliminary review (Art. 24 lit. a KV ZH, § 127 para. 1 lit. a GPR). The deadline begins upon publication in the official gazette. The initiative is then put to the cantonal parliament and the people for a vote.

The 6,000 signatures can be collected in Zurich, Winterthur, Uster, Dübendorf, Dietikon and Wetzikon. These are populous cities in different parts of the canton. With a professional collection system, this is achievable.

9. Strategic Embedding

The Zurich initiative is part of a national strategy: popular initiatives for professional wildlife protection are being launched in coordinated fashion in several cantons. Coordinated measures at national level create synergies in argumentation, media work and political positioning. The canton of Zurich is well suited to serve as the lead canton for German-speaking Switzerland.

10. Next Steps

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 Zurich.

The next step is to form an initiative committee in the canton of Zurich, made up of people from various municipalities within the canton, with eligible voters from the canton of Zurich. The committee ensures the sponsorship of the initiative and gives it political legitimacy.

The legal basis, political argumentation, communicative framework and budget have been laid out in this document. The initiative committee can begin implementation directly.

Cantonal Popular Initiatives: Other Cantons

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 Zurich.

Facts about 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 →