Bounty on Wolves: Canton Schwyz and the Hunting Lobby

At first glance, this may sound like a formality.

In reality, it is a consequential step: The government is thereby clearing the way for private hobby hunters — not just wildlife wardens — to be involved in the killing of wolves in the future.

Under the pretext of “increasing efficiency,” hobby hunters with local knowledge are to be officially permitted in future to hunt protected wildlife such as the wolf. What is already standard practice in Valais and St. Gallen is now being introduced in Schwyz as well — despite the clear protected status enshrined in federal law.

The argument is always the same: hobby hunters are cheaper, relieve pressure on the authorities, and increase the “prospects of success” when it comes to shooting. In other words: the more rifles in the forest, the greater the chance that wolves will disappear. Rather than taking the legal protection seriously and investing in prevention — such as herd protection or public education — the government is relying on shooting as an apparently simple solution.

Particularly disconcerting is the idea of introducing a bounty for killing wolves. This would financially reward the killing of a wolf — a return to the 19th century, when hobby hunters collected bounties for slain predators. Although the wolf was already exterminated in Switzerland in 1872, state hunting law continued to provide for a bounty of 100 francs per kill until as late as 1902. Such incentives are not only ecologically counterproductive, but also socially unacceptable: at a time when biodiversity is under pressure worldwide, paying out money for the killing of protected animals is completely anachronistic. Anyone who still wants to stoke hunting instincts with bounties today reveals just how backward-looking and lobby-driven hunting policy remains in parts of Switzerland.

The official justification that authorities wish to orient themselves toward 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 destroyed and inexperienced young animals increasingly resort to easy prey such as sheep.

Instead of finally developing a modern, holistic predator management approach, the cantonal government is caving to the hunting lobby. The fact that precisely the interest group that has already massively and negatively impacted ungulate populations is now also officially involved in wolf regulation represents a dangerous breach of the dam. Recreational hunting means, for many species, not less wildlife, but more births.

Kanton Schwyz: Eldorado für Jagdverbrechen

The proportion of threatened species is nowhere in the world as high as in Switzerland. Over a third of plant, wildlife and fungal species are considered threatened. Switzerland also ranks last in Europe when it comes to designating protected areas for biodiversity.

The wolf population — as with foxes — self-regulates beyond a certain number within a given area and no longer continues to grow, but instead expands across national borders. Regulatory mechanisms include increased territorial conflicts, higher mortality among young animals, and a limited food supply. Wolves live nomadically in packs within a fixed home range. Pack size fluctuates throughout the year and typically consists of four to six animals — the parent pair and their offspring from one or two years. In Central Europe, territories cover an area of approximately 200 km², depending on prey density.

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

The wolf is not a pest, but part of a healthy ecosystem. Those who artificially keep its populations small, or even incentivize killing through bounties, are sabotaging nature and cementing an unscientific hunting system that has long been out of step with the times.

Regulation of the Chöpfenberg Pack

On 02.09.2025, the Schwyz cantonal government issued a regulatory culling 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. Against this decision by the cantonal government, CHWOLF has filed a supervisory complaint with the canton. The culling order is disproportionate and compatible with neither the Hunting Act nor the Hunting Ordinance.

Legal aspects:

1. Federal law and international requirements
   • The wolf is a protected species under the Federal Act on the Hunting and Protection of Wild Mammals and Birds (JSG) and the Hunting Ordinance (JSV).
   • Switzerland is also bound by international obligations:
     • 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 ensure the long-term preservation of protected species populations. Culling is only permitted in narrow exceptional circumstances (e.g. significant danger to humans or substantial damage to livestock).
2. Exceptional permits
   • Under the Hunting Act, a canton may only authorise culling if all other reasonable measures (e.g. herd protection) are insufficient.
   • The Federal Office for the Environment (BAFU) must generally give its approval.
   • The decision by the Schwyz cantonal government to shoot 2/3 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 a measure.
   • A postulate only examines whether a matter should be implemented.
   • The fact that the cantonal government reinterprets Motion M 13/25 as a postulate may appear formally innocuous — but it allows for the expansion of discretionary latitude at a later stage, for example by officially deploying poorly trained hobby hunters.
4. Legal grey area: bounties / premiums
   • A culling bounty for strictly protected animals would constitute a clear breach of federal law and international obligations.
   • Even if the canton were to formally introduce this, legal challenges would almost certainly succeed, as such a measure would directly undermine the objective of protective legislation — namely, securing the survival of the species.
   • Legal action, international criticism and conflicts with federal law are a very real threat.

IUCN kritisiert Schweizer Wolfsabschüsse 2025

Ecological consequences

1. Disruption of pack structures
   • Wolves live in packs with clearly defined hierarchies.
   • When animals are shot — particularly parents or lead wolves — these 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, as seen in Graubünden.
2. Self-regulation of populations
   • Wolves regulate their own population:
     • territorial conflicts
     • natural mortality (especially juveniles)
     • Limited food supply
   • Studies show: Beyond a certain density, the population does not grow indefinitely but stabilizes.
3. Cascade effects in the ecosystem
   • Wolves are apex predators; they regulate ungulates (roe deer, red deer), which prevents overgrazing and strengthens protective forests.
   • In the absence of wolves, pressure on forests and young plants increases.
   • Culling disrupts this regulation and weakens ecosystem stability.
4. Biodiversity and species protection in Switzerland
   • Already today, over 1/3 of species are threatened (plants, animals, fungi).
   • Switzerland ranks last in Europe in the designation of protected areas.
   • In such a context, a policy that weakens protected species such as the wolf is ecologically counterproductive. The risks include unstable wolf populations, more conflicts with livestock, and a weakened ecosystem.

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

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

Dossier: Wolf in Switzerland: Facts, Politics, and the Limits of Hunting