Driven Hunt in Switzerland

Driven hunts, also known as Bewegungsjagden, work on a single principle: wild animals are driven out of cover and retreat areas by lines of people and sometimes by dogs, until they run in panic into the line of fire. For the animals affected, this is not 'conservation management'. It means massive stress, a high risk of injury and, often, a slow death after missed or grazing shots. For the public, it is a system that deploys firearms in an unsecured, shared space, with no binding duty to give notice and with demonstrable danger to bystanders.

Scientific measurements are unambiguous: wild boars from drive hunts showed an average of 431 nmol/l cortisol in their blood serum, compared with 119 nmol/l in animals shot individually from a high seat, more than three and a half times as much (Kelava Ugarković et al. 2025). These massive quantities of stress hormones affect metabolism, musculature and the animals' entire physical condition, often before the fatal shot is even fired. This dossier brings together the key points, arguments, sources and cases.

What awaits you here

• What a driven hunt is and how it differs from sitting in wait: Definition, procedure and the core structural problem.
• The science of wildlife stress: what cortisol measurements show: Current research findings on stress hormones, meat quality and physical consequences.
• Grazing shots, missed shots, follow-up searches: the suffering often does not end with the first shot: Why shots at fleeing animals are structurally more error-prone and what this means for wild animals.
• Danger to people: when driven hunts become a public safety issue: Documented cases in which walkers, residents and children were injured.
• Wildlife fleeing into villages: what happens when driven hunts get out of control: Cases from the Wild beim Wild archive.
• Political status quo: cantonal law, transparency gaps and the Solothurn example: Where initiatives have been launched and what became of them.
• Hunt Watch: civil society as a monitoring body: How observers can help to document driven hunts in practice.
• What must change: three concrete demands: Restriction leading to a ban, mandatory statistics, safety zones.
• FAQ: The most frequently asked questions about driven hunts in Switzerland, answered briefly and clearly.
• Argumentation guide: Answers to the most common justifications for driven hunts.
• Quick links: All relevant articles, studies and dossiers.

What a driven hunt is and what sets it apart

In a driven hunt, game is deliberately set in motion. Groups of beaters, noise and often dogs force wild animals out of cover, retreats and familiar territories. Shots are fired at fleeing animals, often with restricted visibility, under time pressure and by several people at once. The drive hunt is one variant: the game is moved more slowly and in a more targeted way, usually by a few beaters or dogs. The difference is one of degree; the core problem is the same: flight as a method, shooting at moving targets, many participants, high risk.

Both forms belong to the driven hunt and share the structural problem that distinguishes them from other forms of hunting such as the stand hunt: in a stand hunt, the recreational hunter waits for a calm animal. In a driven hunt, she actively creates stress and shoots at a fleeing animal. This is a fundamental difference: in terms of animal welfare law, safety and ethics. In the canton of Bern, the 2025/2026 hunting regulations already explicitly ban drive and driven hunts in certain areas such as the Schüpfenfluh. This shows that regulation is possible. What is lacking is the political will to implement it across the board.

More on this: Hunting in Switzerland: figures, systems and myths and Wait Hunting: Waiting, Technology and Risks

The science of wildlife stress: what cortisol measurements show

The research on wildlife stress under different forms of hunting is unambiguous. Kelava Ugarković et al. (2025, European Journal of Wildlife Research) measured cortisol in the blood serum of 407 wild boars that had been shot: after drive hunts the mean was 431 nmol/l, after hunting in an enclosure 325 nmol/l, and after single hunting from a high seat 119 nmol/l. Güldenpfennig et al. (2021, Scientific Reports) found elevated cortisol levels in every sample taken from wild boars on drive hunts. Santos et al. (2018, Ecological Indicators) showed in red deer that hunting management factors were the main drivers of variation in stress hormones, ahead of environmental conditions and individual characteristics. And Pedersen et al. (2024, Wildlife Biology) found cortisol levels 6.5 times higher in mountain hares hunted with dogs than in animals killed without dogs. All the studies are listed in the overview Hunting Fact Check.

Cortisol sets off a stress cascade in the body: blood sugar levels rise, glycogen reserves are mobilised, heart rate and blood pressure increase, and blood flow to the muscles intensifies. What this means for the animal: it experiences physiologically measurable mortal terror before the shot is fired. In the study by Kelava Ugarković et al., meat from drive hunts and enclosure hunts also showed elevated pH values and altered colour values, which the authors interpret as stress-related metabolic effects: intense flight leads to glycogen depletion and risky pH values in the meat (so-called DFD meat). This is not theory. It is biochemically measurable and published. Anyone who describes driven hunts as 'gentle on wildlife' is not describing reality but contradicting it.

More on this: Why animal welfare law ends at the forest edge and The misleading statements of JagdSchweiz head David Clavadetscher

Grazing shots, missed kills, follow-up searches: the suffering often does not end with the first shot

Shots at fleeing wild animals are structurally more error-prone than shots at resting animals. The animal is moving, the shooting position is unpredictable, time pressure builds, and group dynamics lower caution. Missed kills and grazing shots are more common in driven hunts than in other forms of hunting.

The Grisons data provide the sharpest picture available: in the five years from 2012 to 2016, 3,836 of the 56,403 red deer, roe deer, chamois and wild boars shot in Grisons hunting were initially only wounded; around 2,200 of these were found with tracking dogs, and around 1,600 escaped with the gunshot wound (SRF, data from the Office for Hunting and Fisheries). In 2021, Grisons tracking-dog handlers were called out for 1,018 follow-up searches, of which 57 per cent were successful (Thousands of hunting offences, barely any animal cruelty convictions). Follow-up searches with hunting dogs are supposed to solve the problem. In practice this means: an animal is wounded, flees, suffers pain and collapses somewhere – if it is found at all, it is found after minutes, hours or days. If it is not found, it dies slowly and remains invisible in the statistics. The follow-up search is not a safety net. It is an admission that the system regularly produces animal suffering.

More on this: Hunting and Animal Welfare: What the Practice Does to Wild Animals and Why Swiss hunting has an aftercare problem

Danger to people: when driven hunts become a safety issue

Driven hunts do not affect wild animals alone. Wherever many shooters, beaters and dogs are out at the same time, risks arise for everyone who uses the same space. Examples:

In November 2025, two walkers were hit by shotgun pellets during a driven hunt in Grossefehn, East Frisia. The 42-year-old woman was hit in the forehead, the 45-year-old man in the arm. A 40-year-old recreational hunter admitted to having fired the shot. She is being investigated on suspicion of negligent bodily harm. The couple had been out with their dog on a public path and did not know that a driven hunt was taking place.

In December 2024, in Barssel/Harkebrügge (Germany), a woman was shot at with shotgun pellets on her own property and had to be taken to hospital because a driven hunt was taking place nearby. In Carinthia, a 16-year-old was hit by shotgun pellets. The pattern is consistent across Europe: driven hunts endanger bystanders because uncontrollable fields of fire, the absence of any duty to give notice, and public paths running through hunting grounds structurally coincide.

In Switzerland there is no systematic, publicly accessible statistic on such incidents. That is not evidence that none occur; it is evidence of an oversight structure that renders such incidents invisible.

More on this: Hunting accidents in Switzerland: figures, risks and structural failure and Hunting and firearms: an unregulated combination

Wildlife fleeing into villages: when driven hunts get out of control

Wild driven into a panic does not respect municipal boundaries. The Wild beim Wild archive documents cases in which wild animals were driven into residential areas during driven hunts: exhausted, injured, disoriented. In such situations the circumstances change fundamentally: a supposedly controlled hunt turns into a dangerous situation in the middle of a village, on a road or in a private garden.

Recreational hunters who "overrun" a village, as Wild beim Wild describes in one documented case, rarely face any consequences. The cantonal nature of hunting enforcement in Switzerland means that practice, oversight and sanction mechanisms vary greatly from canton to canton. A recreational hunter operating in a canton with little oversight is structurally better protected from consequences than the wild animals he hunts.

More on this: Recreational hunters overrun a village during a driven hunt and Hunting and human rights: when wild animals and civil rights collide

Political status quo: cantonal law, transparency gaps and the Solothurn example

Solothurn cantonal councillor Monika Früh submitted a motion to ban driven hunts. The Solothurn government defended the practice, thereby confirming the classic pattern: political motions run up against a hunting administration that is structurally close to hunting interests. Transparency and independent oversight are lacking.

In Switzerland, the enforcement of hunting rules rests largely with the cantons. This leads to heterogeneous practice in oversight, documentation and consequences. Mistaken kills are recorded differently from canton to canton, checks on driven hunts are not standardised, and publicly accessible follow-up search statistics exist in very few cantons. The result: to this day it is impossible to compare cantons with one another or to quantify the structural scale of the problem. This is not a natural information deficit. It is a political decision against transparency, taken in a system that monitors itself.

More on this: Hunting laws and oversight: why self-supervision is not enough and Hunter lobby in Switzerland: how influence works

Hunt Watch: civil society as an oversight body

Hunt Watch is a project that invites citizens to observe, document and report hunts. In a system that is structurally opaque and has no independent external oversight, civil-society observation is an effective counterweight.

Anyone who witnesses a driven hunt can document and report the following:

• Date, time and exact location of the observation
• Signage or lack of signage in the hunting ground
• Proximity to hiking trails, forestry roads or municipal roads
• Observed behaviour towards people seeking recreation, dog owners and bystanders
• Number of participants, visible equipment, behaviour of the dogs
• Reactions to questions from outsiders

Every piece of documentation is a data point in a system that systematically produces no data. Reports: Contact Hunt Watch

More on this: Hunt Watch puts the focus on the people who kill animals and Taking action against recreational hunting

What needs to change

• Restriction up to a ban on driven and drive hunts for reasons of animal welfare and safety
  The canton of Bern has already enshrined bans on drive hunts and driven hunts for certain areas in its hunting ordinance. This shows that regulation is legally possible. A scientifically grounded cantonal debate on the relationship between driven hunts, animal welfare and public safety is long overdue. The bare minimum is a binding moratorium with accompanying, independent monitoring.
• Mandatory, transparent statistics on follow-up searches and missed shots
  Uniform across the canton, publicly accessible, published annually: How many animals were wounded by gunshot? How many follow-up searches were carried out? How many animals were never found? These figures exist only in fragments: in Grisons through access to official records, in other cantons not at all. Without complete data, no independent oversight is possible.
• Stricter rules for hunts near settlements, paths and roads
  Binding minimum distances from public paths and residential areas, an obligation to announce hunts via the municipal gazette and cantonal apps, active closure of hiking trails during driven hunts, and significant sanctions for violations. This corresponds to the standard for other dangerous activities in public spaces and is long overdue for recreational hunting. Template motions: Ban on driven hunts, Public Safety: Minimum Distances, Exclusion Zones, Reporting Obligation and Transparent hunting statistics

FAQ

What is the difference between a driven hunt (Treibjagd) and a drive hunt (Drückjagd)?
Both are driven hunts. In the Treibjagd, wild animals are actively pushed into fields of fire by noise and lines of beaters. In the Drückjagd, game is moved more slowly and in a more targeted way, usually by a few beaters or dogs. Both share the core problem: flight as a method, shooting at moving targets, increased animal suffering and an increased risk of accidents.

Why is 'shooting at moving targets' relevant to animal welfare?
Because the point of impact and visibility are more difficult, time pressure is higher and missed shots become more likely. An animal fleeing in panic does not stand still, offers no optimal shooting position and responds to the sound of gunfire by fleeing further. Grazing shots cause suffering for hours or days, often without the animal ever being found.

Are driven hunts regulated identically across Switzerland?
No. Enforcement is cantonal. Practice, oversight and transparency differ considerably. The canton of Bern has introduced bans on drive hunts and driven hunts for certain areas. Most other cantons have no specific restrictions on driven hunts.

What does “follow-up search” mean and why is it so important?
A follow-up search is the search for wounded game in order to end its suffering. If it is not carried out consistently or not documented, the true extent of animal suffering remains invisible. Since 1 February 2025, Art. 1a JSV obliges the cantons to guarantee hunters “timely and professional support” for follow-up searches; federal law requires neither a reporting obligation nor a public statistic. In most Swiss cantons there is no public follow-up search statistic.

Are there documented cases of game fleeing into villages?
Yes. The Wild beim Wild archive documents cases in which wild animals were driven into residential areas during driven hunts: exhausted, injured, disoriented. Such situations arise when hunting pressure and panic push wild animals beyond their normal territories.

Why is cortisol relevant to the animal welfare debate?
Cortisol is the biochemical proof of stress and fear. Wild boars from drive hunts show cortisol levels more than three and a half times higher than animals calmly shot from a high seat, and mountain hares hunted with dogs show levels 6.5 times higher. This means the animals demonstrably suffer massive fear and stress before and during the drive, long before a shot is fired. This is animal suffering that cannot be defined away.

Talking points

“Driven hunts are gentle on wildlife and well regulated.” Game from drive hunts shows cortisol levels more than three and a half times higher than game taken from a high seat. Missed shots and follow-up searches are structurally more frequent in driven hunts. Walkers are injured because drive hunts take place in open, shared spaces with no obligation to give notice. This is no rare exception. It is the foreseeable result of a form of hunting built on fear and flight.

“Drive hunts are necessary to regulate wild boar populations.” Regulating wild boars is legitimate where documented damage occurs. The question is not “whether” but “how”. Targeted hunting from a high seat at the sites of damage is less burdensome in terms of animal welfare law and easier to control in terms of safety. Area-wide drive hunts as the standard method are neither biologically nor ethically necessary.

“Dogs solve the problem of follow-up searches.” A follow-up search with dogs presupposes that the wounded animal is found. Deserted forests, dense undergrowth, darkness and large hunting grounds make this a structural task that is regularly only partially accomplished. “We are searching” is not the same as “we find”. The figures from the Grisons show that missed shots occur permanently, follow-up search or not.

“Accidents involving bystanders are absolute exceptions.” They are not an exception. They are the foreseeable result of a practice in which shots are fired in a direction where bystanders may be moving without warning. As long as there is no obligation to give notice, no closure of paths and no independent oversight, the residual risk to third parties is structural and not caused by individuals.

Quick links

Articles on Wild beim Wild:

• Drive hunt in the Willbrigwald: fear, blood and the perpetrators
• Drive hunt in Switzerland: when a child shows us how wrong our treatment of wild animals is
• Driven hunt under observation
• Why Swiss hunting has an aftercare problem
• Hunting Fact Check
• Solothurn government defends animal cruelty
• Solothurn woman wants to ban driven hunts
• When recreational hunters shoot, walkers become targets
• Drive hunt in Carinthia: 16-year-old hit by pellets
• Recreational hunters overrun a village during a driven hunt
• Hunt Watch: civil society monitors recreational hunting

Related dossiers:

• Hunting and Wildlife Diseases
• Night hunting and high-tech: the myth of fair hunting
• Hunting Dogs: Use, Suffering and Animal Welfare
• Lead ammunition: the toxic legacy of recreational hunting
• High hunt Switzerland: Traditional ritual and stress test
• Swine fever as a justification for recreational hunting
• Hunting Accidents in Switzerland
• Hunting and Animal Welfare: What the Practice Does to Wild Animals
• Hunting and Weapons
• Driven Hunt in Switzerland
• Wait Hunting: Waiting, Technology and Risks
• Earth hunting
• Trap hunting
• Wait hunting
• Special Hunt in Grisons
• Swiss Hunting Statistics 2025: What the Federal Figures Show
• Poaching and hunting crime in Switzerland: Systematic impunity and the limits of self-control

Our Standard

Driven hunts are the most invasive form of recreational hunting: they cause massive, biochemically measurable stress in wild animals, structurally produce more failed kills than other forms of hunting, and endanger bystanders in publicly accessible areas. The cortisol measurements on 407 wild boars, the Grisons data on 3,836 wounded animals over five years, and the documented safety incidents in Switzerland and across Europe show that driven hunts are neither gentle on wildlife nor safe. IG Wild beim Wild calls for transparency, independent oversight, and the gradual restriction of driven hunts, ultimately leading to a ban. Anyone who wishes to observe or document a driven hunt will find all the information at Hunt Watch and can contact us at any time: Contact.

More on the topic of recreational hunting: in our hunting dossier we bring together fact checks, analyses and background reports.