Bounty on wolves: The canton of Schwyz and the hunting lobby

At first glance this sounds like a formality.

In truth it is a momentous step: The government is thereby clearing the way for not only the wildlife wardens but also private hobby hunters to be involved in the killing of wolves in the future.

Under the pretext of “increasing efficiency”, locally familiar hobby hunters are to be officially permitted in future to hunt protected wild animals such as the wolf. What is already common practice in Valais or St. Gallen is now also being introduced in Schwyz, despite the clear protected status in federal law.

The argument is always the same: hobby hunters are said to be cheaper, to relieve the authorities and to increase the “prospects of success” in kills. In other words: the more guns in the forest, the greater the chance that wolves disappear. Instead of taking the legal protection seriously and investing in prevention – such as herd protection or education – the government relies on the kill as a supposedly simple solution.

Particularly disconcerting is the idea of introducing a kill bounty. This would financially reward the killing of a wolf, a return to the 19th century, when hobby hunters collected a bounty for slain predators. Although the wolf was already exterminated in Switzerland in 1872, the state hunting act provided for a kill bounty of 100 francs until 1902. Such incentives are not only ecologically counterproductive, but also socially unacceptable: at a time when biodiversity is under pressure worldwide, it is completely out of keeping with the times to hand out money for killing protected animals. Anyone who still wants to fuel the hunting urge with bounties today shows how backward-looking and lobby-driven hunting policy still is in parts of Switzerland.

The official justification, that one wishes to follow the “positive experiences” of other cantons, ignores reality: wherever wolves are systematically hunted, new conflicts with livestock arise, because the social structures of the packs are shattered and inexperienced young animals increasingly resort to easy prey such as sheep.

Instead of finally developing a modern, holistic predator management, the cantonal government caves in to the hunting lobby. That of all interest groups, the very one that already massively and negatively influences populations among cloven-hoofed game, is now also officially being brought in to regulate the wolf, is a dangerous breach of the dam. With many species, hobby hunting does not mean less wildlife, but more births.

Kanton Schwyz: Eldorado für Jagdverbrechen

The proportion of threatened species is greater in no country in the world than in Switzerland. More than a third of plants, wild animals and fungal species are considered threatened. Switzerland is also Europe's laggard when it comes to designating protected areas for biodiversity.

The wolf population (and the foxes too) regulates itself once a certain number is reached in a given area and no longer continues to grow, but instead spreads across national borders. The regulatory mechanisms include increased territorial fights, a higher mortality among young animals, or a limited food supply. Wolves live nomadically in packs within a fixed home range. The size of the pack fluctuates over the course of the year and usually amounts to four to six animals: the parent pair and their offspring from one or two years. In Central Europe, depending on prey density, territories cover an area of about 200 km².

If the cantonal council declares the postulate substantial – which is to be expected – Schwyz will join the ranks of those cantons that effectively undermine the protection of the wolf. In the end a distorted impression remains: while federal legislation and international treaties clearly protect the wolf, cantons exploit every loophole to create new hunting opportunities for hobby hunters.

The wolf is not a pest, but part of a healthy ecosystem. Anyone who artificially keeps its populations small, or even incentivises killing with bounties, sabotages nature and cements an unscientific hunting system that has long since become outdated.

Regulation of the Chöpfenberg pack

On 02.09.2025 the Schwyz cantonal government issued a regulatory kill order for the only wolf family living in the canton of Schwyz. By 31.01.2026, 2/3 of the pups are to be shot. CHWOLF has filed a supervisory complaint with the canton against this decision of the cantonal government. The kill order is not proportionate and is compatible with neither the hunting act nor the hunting ordinance.

Legal aspects:

1. Federal law and international requirements
   • Under the Federal Act on Hunting and the Protection of Wild Mammals and Birds (JSG) and the Hunting Ordinance (JSV), the wolf is a protected species.
   • Switzerland is also bound internationally:
     • Bern Convention (Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats)
     • CITES (Washington Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species)
   • These oblige Switzerland to secure populations of protected species in the long term. Kills are only permitted in narrow exceptional cases (e.g. a substantial threat to humans or substantial damage to livestock).
2. Exemption permits
   • Under the hunting act, a canton may only authorise kills if all other reasonable measures (e.g. herd protection) are insufficient.
   • The Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN) must, as a rule, give its consent.
   • The decision of the Schwyz cantonal government to shoot two-thirds of the pups of the Chöpfenberg pack therefore stands on shaky ground: it is hardly proportionate and could be challenged in court.
3. Motion vs. postulate
   • A motion obliges the government to implement it.
   • A postulate merely examines whether a concern should be implemented.
   • The fact that the cantonal government reinterprets motion M 13/25 as a postulate appears formally harmless – but it allows leeway to be widened later, e.g. by officially deploying poorly trained hobby hunters.
4. Legal grey area: bounty / premiums
   • A kill premium for strictly protected animals would be a clear breach of federal law and international obligations.
   • Even if the canton were to formally introduce this, legal appeals would almost certainly succeed, since it would run counter to the aim of the protective legislation – securing the species.
   • Legally, lawsuits, international criticism and conflicts with federal law are looming.

IUCN kritisiert Schweizer Wolfsabschüsse 2025

Ecological consequences

1. Disruption of pack structures
   • Wolves live in packs with clear hierarchies.
   • If animals are shot (especially parents or lead wolves), the structures break down.
   • Consequences: young, inexperienced wolves hunt more easily accessible prey → more attacks on sheep. This often achieves the opposite of what was intended, see Grisons.
2. Self-regulation of populations
   • Wolves regulate their population themselves:
     • Territorial fights
     • natural mortality (especially among young animals)
     • Limited food supply
   • Studies show that above a certain density the population does not keep growing indefinitely, but stabilises.
3. Cascade effects in the ecosystem
   • Wolves are top predators; they regulate cloven-hoofed game (roe deer, red deer), which prevents overgrazing and strengthens the protection forest.
   • Where wolves are absent, the pressure on forests and young plants increases.
   • Kills disrupt this regulation and weaken the stability of the ecosystem.
4. Biodiversity and species protection in Switzerland
   • Already today, over one third of species are threatened (plants, animals, fungi).
   • Switzerland is the European laggard when it comes to designating protected areas.
   • In such a context, a policy that weakens protected species such as the wolf is ecologically absurd. It risks unstable wolf populations, more conflicts with livestock and a weakened ecosystem.

Legally, too, the canton of Schwyz is once again on very thin ice with its planned approach — both with regard to federal law and to international obligations. Ecologically, the approach is counterproductive, as it disrupts natural regulatory mechanisms, destabilises packs and can even intensify conflicts with livestock.

It would make far more sense to invest in herd protection, compensation systems and education, rather than sending militant hobby hunters into the forest with rifles and bounties.

Dossier: Wolf Switzerland: facts, politics and the limits of hunting