Célina Bapst: Huntress of the Year

Since 2015, the circle of recreational killers has been sexistly selecting a Huntress of the Year.

She is expected to serve as an ambassador for hunting at various exhibitions and events. This year, the choice fell on 28-year-old Célina Bapst from Châtel-sur-Montsalvensim in the Gruyères district of the canton of Fribourg.

The 28-year-old teacher successfully passed the Fribourg cantonal hunting exam in 2018 and has since lived out her passion in the company of family and friends. She is, in other words, green behind the ears — but with a killer’s eye. Célina Bapst hunts chamois, roe deer, red deer, wild boar and foxes.

Unlike, say, a Sportswoman of the Year, who is recognised for her outstanding achievements, the Huntress of the Year is evidently selected year after year on the basis of her appearance alone — a blatantly sexist choice — rather than for any exceptional conservation or stewardship efforts. Also represented on the jury was Anton Merkle, President of JagdSchweiz.

The hunting exam is nothing more than a somewhat intensive and sectarian workshop. It comes as no surprise, then, that science fails to prevail and that crude myths and hunters’ tall tales simply refuse to disappear from the world.

Fair chase is a kind of honor code for recreational hunters and, as such, is free from scientific and philosophical foundation. Some aspects are admittedly commendable, but are barely achievable in practice, or are not — and cannot be — guaranteed. It may be considered fair chase to kill an animal without suffering through a heart-lung shot, but missed shots are the order of the day. It is considered fair chase not to shoot a pregnant female, yet who can say with certainty, looking through a scope without a medical examination, as is the case for example with foxes?

The entire hunting process is inherently incompatible with the nature of wild animals. Neither does modern hunting have anything to do with species-appropriate cycles and behavioral patterns, nor is the arbitrary shooting of living beings species-appropriate. Where the baser instincts of humans act destructively, species-appropriate conduct is a far cry away. It is a fairy tale to believe that a wild animal can be killed in a manner appropriate to its nature or in accordance with animal welfare. That is the exclusive domain of predators searching for food. 

Recreational hunters attempt to diminish the moral weight of their actions in their own minds, or to make those actions bearable for themselves. This is something one can indeed observe in serial killers who arrange their crime scenes accordingly, cultivate their own rituals, ultimately keep mementos of their victims, and legitimize themselves through their position of power. The exercise of power is an important keyword in this context.

Murder is a homicide offense. Our criminal law reserves this concept for humans. However, since there is no scientific basis for ranking higher forms of living beings against one another in terms of their value, the current application of this distinction is flawed.

Whether one regards hunting as murder, or merely as killing — because it affects not humans but only other mammals — is once again purely a matter of belief. Biologically, humans are animals, and whether they are more valuable and whether killing them is morally more reprehensible than killing another animal is open to debate. Scientifically, this stance is in any case not justifiable. Morality is the foundation of social coexistence. Therefore, animals too are subject to this morality. And those who believe that other animals — indeed the entire environment — do not belong to our society, and are therefore excluded from moral consideration, would need to be able to demonstrate where the moral boundary lies.

The more we learn about animals, the more we must admit that all arguments for humanity's unique status are void. Pain perception, thinking, communication, or consciousness — we cannot devalue animals to such a degree, based on science, as to justify an act that would be considered immoral among humans, such as killing.

Recreational hunters invoke the necessity of their “trade” for our ecosystem. But this too is scientifically untenable — recreational hunting is completely unnecessary and counterproductive.

That is why we commend the Canton of Geneva for its professional wildlife management without recreational hunters, but with dedicated game wardens. In Geneva, foxes, martens, badgers, etc. are not regulated simply because it is hunting season and misguided individuals want to pursue a hobby. This is also reflected in the federal hunting statistics. 

Typical Swiss values such as safety, animal welfare, and ethics are the guiding principles in Geneva.

Natural disaster: recreational hunters

In the chaos in which nature finds itself after decades of stewardship and management by hobby hunters, the proportion of threatened species is greater than in any other country in the world — and that country is Switzerland. These hired killers have been creating ecological imbalance in the cultivated landscape for decades, with sometimes dramatic consequences (protective forests, disease, agricultural damage, and much more). Over a third of plant species, wildlife, and fungal species are considered threatened. Switzerland also ranks last in Europe when it comes to designating protected areas for biodiversity. It is precisely these circles of recreational hunters, through their lobbying via politics, media, and legislation, who have been responsible for this situation for decades. They are the ones who notoriously block timely, ethical improvements in animal welfare and sabotage serious animal and species protection. Recreational hunters regularly oppose more national parks in Switzerland because their concern is not nature, biodiversity, species conservation, or animal welfare — but rather the pursuit of their perverted, bloody hobby.

Did you know …

• that in Switzerland innocent young wolves are being killed?
• that recreational hunters lie about assessing game meat quality and that, according to the WHO, processed game meat is carcinogenic — like cigarettes, asbestos, or arsenic?
• that according to a study, nowhere is the lead contamination in golden eagles and bearded vultures is higher than in the Swiss Alps, because of the ammunition used by recreational hunters?
• that the hunting ethics of recreational hunters is diametrically opposed to animal welfare legislation and is nothing but a mirage?
• that hunting is war, where animal competitors are simply eliminated?
• that there are countless illegal and unmarked hunting blinds in our countryside, some so rotted that they pose a danger to children and could cost people their lives?
• that year after year countless people are killed or injured by hunters' weapons, some so severely that they end up in wheelchairs or have limbs amputated?
• that in Switzerland approximately 120,000 perfectly healthy roe deer, red deer, foxes, marmots, and chamois are killed each year, mostly for no good reason?
• that because of recreational hunters it is now hardly possible to live in harmony with wildlife or to observe wild animals at all?
• that shotgun blasts make hares scream like small children, and that the entrails of “shot” roe deer and red deer are torn apart so that they leave a trail of blood during their flight for hunters to follow?
• that the recreational hunters' claim that these cruel wildlife massacres are necessary to regulate animal populations has been scientifically refuted?
• that recreational hunters openly admit that hunting is about the “pleasure of killing” and “the joy of making a kill” — a pathological obsession?
• that recreational hunters have no sixth sense, yet regularly claim they only shoot sick and weak animals, which is of course not true in practice?
• that recreational hunters travel abroad for trophy hunting, far from any species protection or hunting regulations, and that there are even Swiss recreational hunter travel agencies catering to such mindless hunting pleasures?
• that the vast majority are not licensed professional hunters, but pursue hunting as a hobby, sport, and leisure activity, which is immoral and in fact contradicts animal welfare legislation?
• that 99.07% of civilised people in Switzerland are not recreational hunters — meaning only 0.3% of recreational hunters take pleasure in these bloody activities?
• that these wildlife killers do not hunt on the basis of scientific justifications?
• that protected species should not fall under hunting law at all, because recreational hunters are overwhelmed by the demands of species conservation and repeatedly shoot animals listed on the Red List — such as lynx, wolf, brown hare, grey partridge, quail, etc. — simply for fun?
• that recreational hunters deliberately decimate certain animal species in order to eliminate competition, engaging in their unnatural behavior (fox, lynx, wolf, birds of prey, etc.)?
• that wildlife dies before the recreational hunter can even fire a single shot, that this needs to be prevented, and that this is arguably the central idea behind wildlife management, care, and hunting plans?
• that with wild boar (and foxes), normally only the lead sow gives birth to young, but due to her being shot, all female animals within the sounder reproduce, and this is also why we have a wild boar overpopulation?
• that grazing animals — deer, roe deer, etc. — originally lived predominantly as diurnal animals in fields and meadows, like goats, sheep, cows, etc., and not in forests?
• that the wolf is vitally important for the long-term health of wild hoofed animals, because it hunts sick or weak animals with extraordinary precision, for example, and is therefore far superior to recreational hunters?
• that foxes, after being pointlessly hunted, usually end up in the rubbish?
• that foxes today are hunted mainly so that there are more hares, etc. for recreational hunters’ frying pans? That the fox, however, feeds on hares in fewer than 10% of cases and would never catch a healthy hare?
• that in animal welfare advocacy against recreational hunters, one cannot rely solely on gentleness, street festivals, prayer chains, etc. (you need to fight fire with fire)?
• that recreational hunters, with their hunters’ tall tales engage in a disrespectful mockery of living beings?
• that it is frowned upon to shoot big game at feeding stations or during mating season, yet the recreational hunter has no qualms about doing exactly this to the fox, a competitor for prey?
• that in some cantons, recreational hunters go hunting solely for the tender meat of a young animal?
• that recreational hunters shoot pregnant mother deer in front of their young, or only shoot young animals during the rearing period (supplementary special hunt)?
• that recreational hunters poison the environment, nature, people, and animals with their ammunition?
• that bestiality, barbarity, cruelty, bloodshed, and senseless suffering cannot be considered cultural heritage in a civilized society?
• that recreational hunters shoot approximately 10’000 roe deer fawns every year?
• that recreational hunters, in harsh winters, lure starving animals with food only to shoot them in a treacherous and cowardly manner?
• that recreational hunters send agitated dogs into burrows to eliminate foxes and badgers (earth hunting)?
• that recreational hunters lure peaceful living creatures into box traps, where they may suffer for days waiting for their killer, or are often subjected to a death struggle lasting hours (trap hunting)?
• that recreational hunters cowardly ambush and shoot or injure peaceful wild animals while they sleep or bask in the sun, using state-of-the-art precision weapons?
• that recreational hunters support awards, fur markets, prize ceremonies for the trophy cult, trophy shows, the fur trade, etc.?
• that recreational hunters press firearms into the hands of underage schoolchildren and practice killing with them?
• that recreational hunters often carry out their cruel acts in isolation, which encourages animal abuse?
• that recreational hunters seriously injure many wild animals, and the victims often suffer for hours in tremendous agony and fear until a tracking dog finds them and they are shot dead?
• that recreational hunters (apart from vivisection) inflict the most suffering and abuse on animals, including through the manner in which they kill?
• that the hunter’s so-called love of animals and nature is not delighted by the existence of the beloved object, but rather aims to possess the beloved creature body and soul, culminating in turning it into prey through the act of killing?
• that recreational hunters actively encourage browsing damage through hunting pressure, particularly on predators such as foxes, lynx and wolves?
• that recreational hunters open the door to antisocial, unethical, and unchristian behaviour?
• that recreational hunters deprive the public of normal, natural wildlife observation and interaction?
• that there is no greater product of cruelty — and one contaminated with ammunition — than venison?
• that there is no uniform national regulation in Switzerland regarding vision tests, shooting practice, etc. for recreational hunters?
• that there is no psychological aptitude test for recreational hunters?
• that there is no alcohol ban for recreational hunters when they shoot at animals with their weapons?
• that recreational hunters intrude into educational institutions to foist their hunters’ tales and their culture of violence upon children?
• that a court in Bellinzona recently confirmed that hunting associations promote virtually everything that is cruel, unnecessary and heartless?
• that the association «Jagd Schweiz» cultivates above all a culture of disrespect and violence — the exact opposite of what a civilised person in our society should aspire to.
• that in the canton of Graubünden alone, over 1’000 fines and citations are issued against recreational hunters every year?