High-altitude hunting in Switzerland: traditional ritual, zone of violence and stress test for wild animals

Every autumn, the high season for hunting transforms entire regions into temporary shooting ranges. For weeks, recreational hunters roam the forests with rifles and culling plans, while wildlife, hikers, and residents share the same space. Authorities speak of "population control" and "tradition," but reports of wounded animals, illegal killings, accidents, and reckless behavior are on the rise. In the canton of Graubünden alone, around 10,000 animals are shot annually during the high season, 9 percent of these kills are illegal, and one in ten deer is only wounded. This dossier uses figures, legal frameworks, and concrete examples to demonstrate why the high season for hunting is not a harmless custom, but rather a stress test for animal welfare, safety, and the credibility of Swiss hunting policy.

What awaits you here

High-hunting system. How high-hunting is structured in Switzerland, which game species are affected, and what role patent and territorial hunting systems play.
Graubünden hotspot. Why the high-altitude hunt in Graubünden exemplifies how a "traditional event" can become a danger zone, what the official figures say about incorrect shootings and fines, and why the hunting inspector himself warns of a "worrying development".
Special hunting as a permanent solution. What happens when culling quotas are not met, how special hunting has evolved from an emergency measure to a routine practice, and why it is particularly problematic from an animal welfare perspective.
Animal welfare and error rates. Why wild animals die without stunning during high-altitude hunting, what the tracking statistics show, and how high-altitude hunting differs from Swiss animal welfare law.
High-altitude hunting is a safety risk. This occurs when shots are fired near settlements, warning signs are lacking, and public spaces become temporary firing zones.
Violence culture and psychology: What the behavior of recreational hunters during the high season reveals about acceptance of violence, group pressure, and self-image.
Politics and law. How hunting law, enforcement practices and lobbying pressure block reforms, and why the national park provides a counterexample.
What needs to change. Concrete political demands: professional game management instead of recreational hunting, hunting-free zones, a ban on harmful hunting practices, and predators as natural regulators. Arguments. Answers to the most important justifications for big game hunting.
Quick links. All relevant articles, studies and dossiers at a glance.

High-level hunting: What it is and what it means from an animal's perspective

The "high hunt" historically originates from a privilege of the nobility: it referred to the hunting of prestigious big game such as red and fallow deer, chamois, and ibex. In Switzerland, the high hunt remains the central hunting period in autumn. Depending on the canton, it lasts several weeks in September, during which red deer, roe deer, and chamois are hunted intensively. Hunting seasons, quotas, and hunting areas are determined by the cantons, while the practical implementation is largely in the hands of recreational hunters with hunting licenses and, in some cases, hunting rights.

Officially, high-altitude hunting is intended to regulate wildlife populations, limit browsing damage in the forest, and create a "balance." From an animal welfare perspective, however, it primarily means one thing: intense hunting pressure in a short period, flight, stress, fear of death, and a high risk of missed and glancing shots. Unlike animals destined for slaughter, which must be stunned before being killed (Art. 21 para. 1 Animal Welfare Act), wild animals during high-altitude hunts generally die without stunning: while fleeing, injured, falling down slopes, and sometimes only after lengthy searches. Art. 178a para. 1 lit. a of the Animal Welfare Ordinance exempts recreational hunting from the requirement to stun. Switzerland's modern understanding of animal welfare thus stands in direct contradiction to a practice that portrays violence as a seasonal "natural custom.".

The scale is considerable: In the 2023/24 hunting season, 65,811 ungulates (roe deer, red deer, chamois) were shot throughout Switzerland, along with over 1,200 protected ibex during high-altitude hunts. A further 23,565 animals were killed during lowland hunts, including almost 20,000 red foxes. These are not isolated incidents, but rather the toll of a massive system .

More on this topic: Animal welfare versus hunting practices in Switzerland and Hunting in Switzerland: Fact check, hunting methods, criticism

High-altitude hunting in Graubünden: When tradition becomes a danger zone

Few cantons demonstrate the downsides of hunting as clearly as Graubünden. In January 2025, hunting inspector Adrian Arquint warned in the magazine "Bündner Jäger" of a "worrying trend": During the 2024 hunting season, there were negative incidents involving the behavior of individual recreational hunters and, in some cases, entire hunting groups, towards other recreational hunters, non-hunters, wildlife, and game wardens. Department head Lukas Walser confirmed to SRF that "significantly more incidents were registered, especially around Chur": shootings near residential areas, conflicts between recreational hunters, and damage to other people's hunting stands.

The official figures paint a structural picture. During the high season, around 10,000 deer, chamois, roe deer, and wild boar are killed in the canton of Graubünden each year. Approximately 9 percent of these kills are illegal. During the 2022 high season, the Office for Hunting and Fishing reported 790 incorrect kills out of around 9,200 animals killed, a proportion that, according to game warden Stefan Rauch, is "roughly the same every year." One in ten deer is merely wounded instead of being cleanly killed. In the five years prior to 2016, recreational hunters paid over 700,000 Swiss francs in fines for incorrect kills. In 2014 alone, 1,007 fines were issued and 95 charges were filed with the district offices; practically one in five of the 5,804 active recreational hunters was an offender that year.

The consequences for rule violations are minor: fines of up to 500 Swiss francs, in practice a symbolic amount. No hunting license is permanently revoked, and no systematic suitability assessment is initiated. The message is clear: recreational hunting tolerates legal violations as a calculated systemic risk.

More on this topic: High-altitude hunting in Graubünden under pressure: Control and consequences for recreational hunters and The blacklist of Hunting Switzerland

Special hunt: When animal cruelty becomes routine

The high season officially ends on the last day of hunting. In reality, it is often extended by special and supplementary hunts. If culling quotas during the high season are not met, cantons order additional hunts in late autumn to "correct populations." Particular focus is placed on hinds and fawns, often on steep slopes, in snow, fog, and poor visibility, with a correspondingly high risk of misfires.

The figures demonstrate that special hunts are no longer an exceptional measure. In the canton of Bern, a total of 1,047 red deer were shot in 2023, a third of the estimated population. Of these, 133 hinds and fawns were killed during the special hunt alone, which took place from November 24 to December 6 in the game reserves of the Bernese Oberland. Officially, this is called "regulatory mandate fulfilled." From an animal welfare perspective, however, it is a hunting regime that is gradually lowering the threshold for how deeply wildlife populations can be affected.

In Graubünden, 3,432 red deer and 2,502 roe deer were shot during the 2025 high season, a result above the 20-year average. The canton described it as a success. Nevertheless, it declared a special hunt in November and December: an additional 1,711 female red deer and their calves, 281 roe deer, and 10 chamois were to be killed. There are no upper limits for wild boar; they may be hunted year-round.

The "contradiction model" of hunting planning is particularly problematic: What is prohibited, unethical, and punishable during the high-altitude hunt in September—namely, the shooting of young and mother animals—is expressly desired during the special hunt a few weeks later. Pregnant hinds are shot, fetuses suffocate in the womb, and calves wander or starve. Driven hunts in late autumn cause massive stress, a high risk of injury, and forced flight over long distances, precisely at the time when wild animals need to build up their energy reserves for winter. What is labeled as an aftermath of the high-altitude hunt is, in effect, a second hunting program with drastic consequences for animal welfare and winter survival.

More on this topic: The special hunt in Bern: From emergency to permanent solution and special hunts and the limits of recreational hunting

High-altitude hunting as a safety risk: When the forest becomes a shooting zone

Hunting by hunters is no longer confined to uninhabited wilderness areas. Hikers, bikers, families, and locals use the same trails and slopes where recreational hunters with live ammunition are active. When shots are fired in close proximity to trails, and warning signs are missing or ignored, public spaces temporarily become danger zones. The responsibility lies not with hikers, but with a system that permits deadly violence under recreational conditions.

Documented cases from the Swiss Hunting Association's blacklist show that recreational hunters regularly shoot at the wrong targets: donkeys instead of deer, cats instead of foxes, sheep instead of wild boar. In a militia system with an aging hunting population, performance-based culling quotas, and peer pressure, the risk of incorrect decisions and misfires increases. In Switzerland, recreational hunters, a high-risk group, cause injuries and fatalities every year. That this particular practice is protected as "preserving tradition" seems anachronistic from the perspective of public safety awareness.

The Graubünden authorities themselves confirm the problem: Lukas Walser from the Office for Hunting and Fishing admitted to SRF that for some recreational hunters, "their own hunting success becomes more central, and awareness of the surrounding environment recedes into the background." Hunting inspector Arquint warned that without "personal responsibility and sensitivity," "the credibility of hunting" is at stake.

More on this topic: Hobby hunting fact check: A quick license to kill instead of knowledge , and Hunting and weapons: Risks, accidents and the dangers of armed hobby hunters

Animal welfare versus high-altitude hunting: stress, fear of death and error rate

The Swiss Animal Welfare Act (Art. 4 para. 2 TSchG) stipulates that no one may unjustifiably inflict pain, suffering, or harm on an animal. Art. 26 para. 1 lit. a TSchG criminalizes animal cruelty. The Foundation for Animal Law (TIR) has criticized for years that driven hunts, including battues, driven hunts, and hunting in dens, subject wild animals to massive stress and a high risk of misfires. These problems are compounded during high-altitude hunting season: high hunting pressure in a short period, frantic flight movements, shots fired at a distance in difficult terrain, and tracking wounded game that is delayed or never carried out at all.

The statistics on tracking wounded game confirm just how little control there actually is in high-altitude hunting. In Graubünden, tracking is required around 1,100 times a year. Of these, only about half are successful. Between 2012 and 2016, 56,403 red deer, roe deer, chamois, and wild boar were killed in the canton, with up to 1,000 animals classified as accidental kills in five years. Studies on glancing blows document hundreds of wild animals with gunshot wounds that are found dead, and this is just the tip of the iceberg. Analyses suggest that a significant proportion of shot animals are initially only wounded and are found days later or die somewhere in the field.

While animals destined for slaughter must be restrained and stunned on the farm, wild animals are killed under maximum stress during hunts. They flee in mortal fear, are frequently injured, and often die out of sight of the hunters. From an animal ethics perspective, it is difficult to justify why a state that claims to protect animals permits such practices as a leisure activity instead of reducing them to the absolute minimum under professional control.

More on this topic: Wild animals, fear of death and lack of stunning , and hunting and animal welfare: What the reality is doing to wild animals

Violence culture in hunting: What the behavior of hobby hunters reveals

Anyone who regularly kills animals is committing violence, legally sanctioned, but violence nonetheless. High-altitude hunting is the concentrated form of this culture of violence: groups of recreational hunters who want to meet quotas, push each other, compare trophies and "successes," and operate in an environment where lies and exaggeration are part of the folklore. The annual report of the Graubünden Office for Food Safety and Animal Health noted that up to 30 percent of wild animal carcasses were incorrectly assessed by recreational hunters: an indication that there is systematic cheating when assessing meat quality.

When hunting authorities report "ruthless conflicts" among recreational hunters, damage to hunting blinds, and an increase in fines, it shows that this isn't about a few bad apples, but rather a structural problem. The high season for hunting creates a concentration effect: within three weeks, thousands of recreational hunters are simultaneously released into a limited area, under pressure to perform, driven by hunting fever and trophy ambitions. Psychologically, this situation shifts boundaries. Those who experience violence as a leisure activity, label it as "wildlife management," and constantly see it glorified in photos of successful hunters, stories, and hunting magazines , become accustomed to a normalization of killing.

High-altitude hunting is emblematic of the performance-driven narrative of recreational hunting: presence in the field, fulfillment of requirements, status within the group. A psychological analysis describes recreational hunting as an institutionalized form of violence, in which the death of wild animals has become the social glue of a scene. The question of whether such a culture should still be socially legitimized in a modern society is long overdue.

More information: Psychology of hunting in the canton of Graubünden and dossier on the psychology of hunting

Politics and Law: Hunting Law, Lobbying and Blockades

The Federal Act on Hunting and the Protection of Wild Mammals and Birds (JSG, SR 922.0) establishes a framework: which species are protected, which may be hunted, and what objectives hunting should pursue. The specific implementation, hunting system, hunting seasons, high-season hunting regulations, and the use of special hunts are the responsibility of the cantons. Officially, these are intended to balance animal welfare, safety, ecology, and societal concerns.

In practice, hunting authorities and political bodies are often heavily influenced by recreational hunters. The close institutional ties between hunting authorities, hunters, and agricultural interests make independent oversight difficult. Animal welfare demands for hunting-free zones, restrictions on particularly damaging hunting methods, or a transfer of responsibilities to professional game wardens meet with fierce resistance.

The deadlock is exemplified in Graubünden. In 2019, a popular initiative to abolish special hunting permits was submitted with over 10,000 signatures. Government Councillor Mario Cavigelli (CVP) failed to disclose that the Federal Office for the Environment (FOEN) had determined the initiative did not violate any higher-level law and that alternatives existed. The 120-member Grand Council recommended rejecting the initiative by a vote of 96 to 1, based on incomplete information . The IG Wild beim Wild (Wildlife Interest Group) filed a criminal complaint. As long as hunting rights are primarily understood as an instrument to secure recreational hunting, big game hunting will remain a symbol of political gridlock.

An often-overlooked counter-argument lies right in the heart of the canton: The Swiss National Park has demonstrated for over a century that ungulate populations fluctuate within natural ranges without recreational hunting, controlled by climate, food supply, disease, and predators. Those who are serious about population control need not send more recreational hunters into the forest, but rather improve habitats and accept predators as natural regulators. In Graubünden itself, the return of the wolf in certain areas has already contributed to reducing the roe deer population and the need for targeted hunting . The forestry association welcomes this development. The lynx has also demonstrably reduced roe deer populations in regions such as Toggenburg, Uri, the Bernese Oberland, and Solothurn.

More on this: Hobby hunters in Graubünden have failed and Canton of Geneva: The alternative model without hobby hunting

What would need to change

Reducing recreational hunting in favor of professional game wardens: Where populations truly need to be regulated, game wardens with federal certification, clear standards, and oversight take center stage, rather than recreational hunters with their own agendas. The Canton of Geneva has successfully implemented this model since 1974. A model initiative: Game wardens instead of recreational hunters.
Hunting-free zones and longer hunting-free periods: Wild animals need large, open areas free from hunting pressure so they can exhibit natural behaviors and reduce stress. High-altitude hunting must no longer serve as justification for a hunting cycle that lasts almost the entire season. Model initiative: Wildlife corridors and quiet zones
Ban on particularly damaging hunting methods: Driven hunts and hunts in difficult terrain, in snow, or in the immediate vicinity of settlements and roads must be prohibited. Anyone who wants to reconcile recreational hunting with animal welfare must first put an end to these extreme practices.
Stricter access requirements and aptitude tests for hunting licenses: The increasing number of fines (over 1,000 annually in Graubünden alone), accidents, and incidents shows that the current system does not reliably keep unsuitable individuals out. Model initiative: Transparent hunting statistics
Accept predators as natural regulators: Scientific studies show that wolves are the most effective regulators of ungulate populations. The increasing culling of wolves counteracts this natural solution. Cantons must integrate predators into their wildlife management strategies instead of trying to control them.

Argumentation

“Without intensive hunting, populations would explode.” The hunting law stipulates population control as a goal, but high populations are often the result of human intervention: feeding, agriculture, the culling of predators, hunting-related stress, and the shift of the animals to nocturnal activity. Graubünden itself shows that despite decades of intensive hunting, the deer population has increased from 9,000 to over 15,400. In areas where the wolf has returned, however, populations are declining naturally. An ecological strategy would first improve habitats and allow natural regulation through predators.

"These are just isolated incidents; most recreational hunters are law-abiding." The figures from Graubünden contradict this narrative: 790 incorrect kills out of 9,200 animals harvested in a single hunting season (2022), 9 percent illegal kills, fines exceeding 700,000 Swiss francs in five years, and over 1,000 reports and fines annually. Recurring reports of accidents, rule violations, and the use of special hunts as a permanent tool reveal structural deficiencies, not mere lapses in judgment.

"Highland hunting is living culture." Many historical practices, from bear baiting to bullfighting, are considered unacceptable today, even though they were once considered part of culture. Culture is not a moral free pass. A "tradition" based on mortal fear, injury, and safety risks must be measured against today's animal welfare and ethical standards.

"Hunting protects the forest; it's essential." Animal welfare and nature conservation experts emphasize that recreational hunting can only be one of several tools. Crucial factors are forest conversion, protected areas, predator control, and agricultural policies that allow natural processes to unfold. The Swiss National Park has demonstrated for over a century that ungulate populations fluctuate within natural ranges without recreational hunting. Hunting practices that combat predators and primarily rely on large-scale hunting as their main tool primarily reinforce themselves.

"Stricter rules jeopardize the acceptance of hunters." The question is, whose acceptance is decisive: that of a shrinking minority of recreational hunters (0.3 percent of the Swiss population holds a hunting license) or that of the general population, which increasingly views wild animals as sentient beings. Anyone seeking societal legitimacy must align themselves with societal standards.

"Special hunts are an emergency measure." In Graubünden, special hunts have been conducted annually since 1989. In the canton of Bern, they have been a firmly established component of red deer management for years. What has been happening for thirty consecutive years is not an emergency, but a systemic flaw that masks the fact that regular hunting alone cannot meet the politically desired culling quotas.

Quick links

Posts on Wild beim Wild:

Related dossiers:

External sources:

Our claim

High-altitude hunting serves as a lens through which Switzerland views wildlife: as populations to be regulated, as hunting targets, and as collateral damage of a recreational culture. This dossier documents why a hunting model based on fear of death, error rates, and special hunts is incompatible with a 21st-century animal welfare state, and what alternatives exist. The dossier is continuously updated as new data, court rulings, or political developments necessitate it.

More on the topic of hobby hunting: In our dossier on hunting, we compile fact checks, analyses and background reports.